Table 1.
Outcomesa | Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI) | Participants (n) | Studies (n) | Quality of evidence (GRADEb) | Comments |
Postintervention knowledge scores: measured via MCQsc or quiz. Follow-up: immediate postintervention only | The mean knowledge score in the intervention group was 0.44 SDs higher (0.18 to 0.69 higher) than the mean score in the traditional learning group | 603 | 8 | Moderated | 1 study [36] reported mean change scores within the group, and hence, the study data were excluded from the pooled analysis |
Postintervention skill scores: measured via survey and OSCEe. Follow-up duration: immediate postintervention only | The mean skill score in the intervention group was 1.12 SDs higher (0.81 to 1.43 higher) than the mean score in the traditional learning group | 235 | 4 | Moderated | 3 studies were excluded from the analysis as 1 study reported incomplete outcome data [29], 1 study assessed mixed outcomes [36], and 1 study reported self-reported outcome data [24] |
Postintervention attitude scores: measured via survey. Follow-up duration: immediate postintervention only | The mean attitudinal score in the intervention group was 0.19 SDs higher (−0.35 lower to 0.73 higher) than the mean score in the traditional learning group | 83 | 2 | Moderated | N/Af |
Postintervention satisfaction scores: measured via survey. Follow-up duration: immediate postintervention only | Not estimable | 100 | 1 | Lowd,g | 5 studies [24,29,33,48,52] reported incomplete outcome data or lacked comparable data. Therefore, these studies were excluded from the analysis. |
aPatient or population: health professionals; settings: universities and hospitals; intervention: virtual reality; comparison: traditional learning (face-to-face lecture, textbooks, etc).
bGRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect; moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate; low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate; and very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate.
cMCQs: multiple choice questions.
dDowngraded by 1 level for study limitations: the risk of bias was unclear or high in most included studies (−1).
eOSCE: objective structured clinical examination.
fN/A: not applicable.
gDowngraded as results were obtained from a single small study (−1).