增强现实与其他教学方法在解剖学学习中的比较:系统综述。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q1 ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY Clinical Anatomy Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1002/ca.24234
Ally Williams, Zhonghua Sun, Mauro Vaccarezza
{"title":"增强现实与其他教学方法在解剖学学习中的比较:系统综述。","authors":"Ally Williams, Zhonghua Sun, Mauro Vaccarezza","doi":"10.1002/ca.24234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Augmented reality (AR) has been investigated as an engaging educational tool that motivates undergraduate health science students to learn human anatomy. AR technology is developing rapidly, supporting medical education by presenting models of human anatomy as digital objects overlaid in the real world via mobile or head-mounted display (HMD). The purpose of this systematic review is to provide a post-pandemic analysis of AR compared with other methods for teaching anatomy and to determine the effects of AR on learning outcomes (LOs). Original research published between January 2020 and April 2024 was obtained from the WOS, Scopus, MEDLINE(Ovid), EMBASE, and PubMed databases, following PRISMA 2020 protocols. Articles included for analysis compared AR with alternative pedagogical methods of teaching undergraduate human anatomy. Studies that described AR as \"mixed reality\" (MR) were included, while those describing \"virtual reality\" (VR) were not considered. Risk of bias and limitations in individual studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment with Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool. Data were synthesized using a convergent integrated approach with LOs tabulated for visual analysis. A total of 17 articles were eligible for review: nine studies comparing AR via HMD hardware, and eight comparing mobile AR. The LOs of 12 studies were overwhelmingly reported as non-significant. Insufficient data precluded an accurate meta-analysis of LOs, and critical analysis revealed a considerable risk of bias and lack of justified methodology. While AR holds potential for supporting undergraduate students in learning anatomy, definitive outcomes from the current literature are limited by the heterogeneous nature of the studies and inconsistent use of terminology. It is recommended that future research employs professional AR technologies and incorporates the perspectives of university educators to ensure reliable outcomes that can direct the further development of AR technology in medical education.</p>","PeriodicalId":50687,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Anatomy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of augmented reality with other teaching methods in learning anatomy: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Ally Williams, Zhonghua Sun, Mauro Vaccarezza\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ca.24234\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Augmented reality (AR) has been investigated as an engaging educational tool that motivates undergraduate health science students to learn human anatomy. AR technology is developing rapidly, supporting medical education by presenting models of human anatomy as digital objects overlaid in the real world via mobile or head-mounted display (HMD). The purpose of this systematic review is to provide a post-pandemic analysis of AR compared with other methods for teaching anatomy and to determine the effects of AR on learning outcomes (LOs). Original research published between January 2020 and April 2024 was obtained from the WOS, Scopus, MEDLINE(Ovid), EMBASE, and PubMed databases, following PRISMA 2020 protocols. Articles included for analysis compared AR with alternative pedagogical methods of teaching undergraduate human anatomy. Studies that described AR as \\\"mixed reality\\\" (MR) were included, while those describing \\\"virtual reality\\\" (VR) were not considered. Risk of bias and limitations in individual studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment with Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool. Data were synthesized using a convergent integrated approach with LOs tabulated for visual analysis. A total of 17 articles were eligible for review: nine studies comparing AR via HMD hardware, and eight comparing mobile AR. The LOs of 12 studies were overwhelmingly reported as non-significant. Insufficient data precluded an accurate meta-analysis of LOs, and critical analysis revealed a considerable risk of bias and lack of justified methodology. While AR holds potential for supporting undergraduate students in learning anatomy, definitive outcomes from the current literature are limited by the heterogeneous nature of the studies and inconsistent use of terminology. It is recommended that future research employs professional AR technologies and incorporates the perspectives of university educators to ensure reliable outcomes that can direct the further development of AR technology in medical education.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50687,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Anatomy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Anatomy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.24234\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Anatomy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.24234","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

增强现实(AR)已被研究为一种吸引人的教育工具,可激励健康科学本科生学习人体解剖学。增强现实技术发展迅速,通过手机或头戴式显示器(HMD)将人体解剖学模型呈现为叠加在现实世界中的数字对象,从而为医学教育提供支持。本系统综述旨在对 AR 与其他解剖学教学方法进行流行后分析,并确定 AR 对学习效果 (LO) 的影响。按照 PRISMA 2020 协议,从 WOS、Scopus、MEDLINE(Ovid)、EMBASE 和 PubMed 数据库中获取了 2020 年 1 月至 2024 年 4 月间发表的原创性研究。纳入分析的文章比较了 AR 与其他本科人体解剖学教学方法。将 AR 描述为 "混合现实"(MR)的研究被纳入其中,而描述为 "虚拟现实"(VR)的研究则不予考虑。使用多元化研究质量评估(QuADS)工具对各项研究的偏倚风险和局限性进行了评估。采用聚合综合法对数据进行综合,并将 LOs 列成表格,以便进行可视化分析。共有 17 篇文章符合审查条件:9 项研究比较了通过 HMD 硬件实现的 AR,8 项研究比较了移动 AR。12项研究的LOs绝大多数被报告为不显著。由于数据不足,无法对实验结果进行准确的荟萃分析,批判性分析显示存在相当大的偏倚风险,并且缺乏合理的方法。虽然AR在支持本科生学习解剖学方面具有潜力,但由于研究的异质性和术语使用的不一致性,目前文献的明确结果受到了限制。建议今后的研究采用专业的AR技术,并纳入大学教育者的观点,以确保取得可靠的成果,从而指导AR技术在医学教育中的进一步发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of augmented reality with other teaching methods in learning anatomy: A systematic review.

Augmented reality (AR) has been investigated as an engaging educational tool that motivates undergraduate health science students to learn human anatomy. AR technology is developing rapidly, supporting medical education by presenting models of human anatomy as digital objects overlaid in the real world via mobile or head-mounted display (HMD). The purpose of this systematic review is to provide a post-pandemic analysis of AR compared with other methods for teaching anatomy and to determine the effects of AR on learning outcomes (LOs). Original research published between January 2020 and April 2024 was obtained from the WOS, Scopus, MEDLINE(Ovid), EMBASE, and PubMed databases, following PRISMA 2020 protocols. Articles included for analysis compared AR with alternative pedagogical methods of teaching undergraduate human anatomy. Studies that described AR as "mixed reality" (MR) were included, while those describing "virtual reality" (VR) were not considered. Risk of bias and limitations in individual studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment with Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool. Data were synthesized using a convergent integrated approach with LOs tabulated for visual analysis. A total of 17 articles were eligible for review: nine studies comparing AR via HMD hardware, and eight comparing mobile AR. The LOs of 12 studies were overwhelmingly reported as non-significant. Insufficient data precluded an accurate meta-analysis of LOs, and critical analysis revealed a considerable risk of bias and lack of justified methodology. While AR holds potential for supporting undergraduate students in learning anatomy, definitive outcomes from the current literature are limited by the heterogeneous nature of the studies and inconsistent use of terminology. It is recommended that future research employs professional AR technologies and incorporates the perspectives of university educators to ensure reliable outcomes that can direct the further development of AR technology in medical education.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Anatomy
Clinical Anatomy 医学-解剖学与形态学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
154
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Anatomy is the Official Journal of the American Association of Clinical Anatomists and the British Association of Clinical Anatomists. The goal of Clinical Anatomy is to provide a medium for the exchange of current information between anatomists and clinicians. This journal embraces anatomy in all its aspects as applied to medical practice. Furthermore, the journal assists physicians and other health care providers in keeping abreast of new methodologies for patient management and informs educators of new developments in clinical anatomy and teaching techniques. Clinical Anatomy publishes original and review articles of scientific, clinical, and educational interest. Papers covering the application of anatomic principles to the solution of clinical problems and/or the application of clinical observations to expand anatomic knowledge are welcomed.
期刊最新文献
"Practical Anatomy is to medical men what mathematics are to the physicist". Using large language models (ChatGPT, Copilot, PaLM, Bard, and Gemini) in Gross Anatomy course: Comparative analysis. Is dissection or prosection equal in dental anatomy education? Comparative assessment of three AI platforms in answering USMLE Step 1 anatomy questions or identifying anatomical structures on radiographs. Treatment of thoracic outlet syndrome to relieve chronic migraine.
×
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