Comparing Learning Outcomes of Machine-Guided Virtual Reality-Based Training With Educator-Guided Training in a Metaverse Environment: Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR Serious Games Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI:10.2196/58654
Dilek Kitapcioglu, Mehmet Emin Aksoy, Arun Ekin Ozkan, Tuba Usseli
{"title":"Comparing Learning Outcomes of Machine-Guided Virtual Reality-Based Training With Educator-Guided Training in a Metaverse Environment: Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Dilek Kitapcioglu, Mehmet Emin Aksoy, Arun Ekin Ozkan, Tuba Usseli","doi":"10.2196/58654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Virtual reality (VR) modules are commonly used for health care training, such as adult advanced cardiac life support (ACLS), due to immersion and engagement. The metaverse differs from current VR serious gaming by enabling shared social connections, while current VR modules focus on computer-based content without social interaction. Educators in the metaverse can foster communication and collaboration during training sessions.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare learning outcomes of VR-based, machine-guided training with educator-guided, VR-based training in the metaverse environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 62 volunteered students from Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University Vocational School for Anesthesiology were randomly divided into 2 groups of 31 participants each: one group received VR-based training with machine guidance (MG), and the other received VR-based training with educator guidance (EG) in the metaverse. The members of both groups undertook VR-based basic training for ACLS. Afterward, the MG group was trained with a VR-based advanced training module, which provides training with full MG, whereas the EG group attended the VR-based, educator-guided training in the metaverse. The primary outcome of the study was determined by the exam score of the VR-based training module. Descriptive statistics defined continuous variables such as VR exam scores and time spent on machine- or educator-guided training. The correlation between training time and VR exam scores was assessed with the Spearman rank correlation, and nonnormally distributed variables were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Statistical significance was set at P<.05, with analyses executed by MedCalc Statistical Software (version 12.7.7).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing the VR test scores between the MG and EG groups revealed no statistically significant difference. The VR test scores for the EG group had a median of 86 (range 11-100). In contrast, the MG group scores had a median of 66 (range 13-100; P=.08). Regarding the correlation between the duration of machine-guided or educator-guided training and VR-based exam scores, for the MG group, =0.569 and P=.005 were obtained. For the EG group, this correlation was found to be =0.298 and P=.10. While this correlation is statistically significant for the MG group, it is not significant for the EG group. The post hoc power analysis (80%), considering the correlation between the time spent on training and exam scores, supported this finding.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of this study suggest that a well-designed, VR-based serious gaming module with MG could provide comparable learning outcomes to VR training in the metaverse with EG for adult ACLS training. Future research with a larger sample size could explore whether social interaction with educators in a metaverse environment offers added benefits for learners.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06288087; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06288087.</p>","PeriodicalId":14795,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Serious Games","volume":"12 ","pages":"e58654"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11339586/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Serious Games","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/58654","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Virtual reality (VR) modules are commonly used for health care training, such as adult advanced cardiac life support (ACLS), due to immersion and engagement. The metaverse differs from current VR serious gaming by enabling shared social connections, while current VR modules focus on computer-based content without social interaction. Educators in the metaverse can foster communication and collaboration during training sessions.

Objective: This study aimed to compare learning outcomes of VR-based, machine-guided training with educator-guided, VR-based training in the metaverse environment.

Methods: A total of 62 volunteered students from Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University Vocational School for Anesthesiology were randomly divided into 2 groups of 31 participants each: one group received VR-based training with machine guidance (MG), and the other received VR-based training with educator guidance (EG) in the metaverse. The members of both groups undertook VR-based basic training for ACLS. Afterward, the MG group was trained with a VR-based advanced training module, which provides training with full MG, whereas the EG group attended the VR-based, educator-guided training in the metaverse. The primary outcome of the study was determined by the exam score of the VR-based training module. Descriptive statistics defined continuous variables such as VR exam scores and time spent on machine- or educator-guided training. The correlation between training time and VR exam scores was assessed with the Spearman rank correlation, and nonnormally distributed variables were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Statistical significance was set at P<.05, with analyses executed by MedCalc Statistical Software (version 12.7.7).

Results: Comparing the VR test scores between the MG and EG groups revealed no statistically significant difference. The VR test scores for the EG group had a median of 86 (range 11-100). In contrast, the MG group scores had a median of 66 (range 13-100; P=.08). Regarding the correlation between the duration of machine-guided or educator-guided training and VR-based exam scores, for the MG group, =0.569 and P=.005 were obtained. For the EG group, this correlation was found to be =0.298 and P=.10. While this correlation is statistically significant for the MG group, it is not significant for the EG group. The post hoc power analysis (80%), considering the correlation between the time spent on training and exam scores, supported this finding.

Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that a well-designed, VR-based serious gaming module with MG could provide comparable learning outcomes to VR training in the metaverse with EG for adult ACLS training. Future research with a larger sample size could explore whether social interaction with educators in a metaverse environment offers added benefits for learners.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06288087; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06288087.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较基于机器引导的虚拟现实培训与基于教育者引导的元环境培训的学习效果:随机对照试验。
背景:虚拟现实(VR)模块因其沉浸感和参与性,常用于医疗保健培训,如成人高级心脏生命支持(ACLS)。元宇宙(metaverse)与当前的虚拟现实严肃游戏不同,它实现了共享的社交联系,而当前的虚拟现实模块侧重于基于计算机的内容,没有社交互动。元宇宙中的教育者可以在培训课程中促进交流与合作:本研究旨在比较基于 VR 的机器引导式培训与基于 VR 的元宇宙环境下教育者引导式培训的学习效果:方法:Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar 大学麻醉学职业学校的 62 名志愿学生被随机分为两组,每组 31 人:一组接受基于 VR 的机器引导式培训(MG),另一组接受基于 VR 的元虚拟环境培训(EG)。两组成员都接受了基于 VR 的 ACLS 基础培训。之后,MG 组接受了基于 VR 的高级培训模块的培训,该模块提供完整的 MG 培训,而 EG 组则参加了基于 VR 的、由教育者指导的元虚拟培训。研究的主要结果由基于 VR 的培训模块的考试成绩决定。描述性统计定义了连续变量,如 VR 考试分数和机器或教育者指导培训所花费的时间。培训时间与 VR 考试成绩之间的相关性采用斯皮尔曼等级相关性进行评估,非正态分布变量采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验进行比较。统计显著性设定为 PResults:比较 MG 组和 EG 组的 VR 测试得分,发现没有显著的统计学差异。EG 组的 VR 测试得分中位数为 86(范围为 11-100)。相比之下,MG 组得分的中位数为 66(范围为 13-100;P=.08)。关于机器指导或教育者指导培训的持续时间与基于虚拟现实的考试成绩之间的相关性,MG 组的相关性为 =0.569,P=.005。EG 组的相关性为 =0.298,P=.10。虽然这一相关性对 MG 组具有显著的统计学意义,但对 EG 组并不显著。考虑到培训时间与考试成绩之间的相关性,事后功率分析(80%)支持这一结论:本研究的结果表明,在成人 ACLS 培训中,设计良好、基于 VR 的严肃游戏模块(MG)可提供与元宇宙中的 VR 培训(EG)相当的学习效果。未来的研究如果样本量更大,可以探索在元宇宙环境中与教育者的社交互动是否能为学习者带来更多益处:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06288087; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06288087.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR Serious Games
JMIR Serious Games Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
91
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR Serious Games (JSG, ISSN 2291-9279) is a sister journal of the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR), one of the most cited journals in health informatics (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175). JSG has a projected impact factor (2016) of 3.32. JSG is a multidisciplinary journal devoted to computer/web/mobile applications that incorporate elements of gaming to solve serious problems such as health education/promotion, teaching and education, or social change.The journal also considers commentary and research in the fields of video games violence and video games addiction.
期刊最新文献
A Mixed Reality-based Tele-Supervised Ultrasound Education Platform on 5G network compared to Direct Supervision: Prospective Randomized Pilot Trial. Comparison of Occupational Performance in Immersive Virtual and Real Environments Among Patients With Stroke: Observational Randomized Crossover Pilot Study. Correction: Effects of Virtual Reality Therapy for Patients With Breast Cancer During Chemotherapy: Randomized Controlled Trial. Risk Perception and Knowledge Following a Social Game-Based Tobacco Prevention Program for Adolescents: Pilot Randomized Comparative Trial. Sensing In Exergames for Efficacy and Motion Quality: Scoping Review of Recent Publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1