Background: Extended reality, which encompasses virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality (MR), is increasingly used in medical education. Studies assessing the effectiveness of these new educational modalities should measure relevant outcomes using outcome measurement tools with validity evidence. Objective: Our aim is to determine the choice of outcomes, measurement instruments, and the use of measurement instruments with validity evidence in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of VR, AR, and MR in medical student education. Methods: We conducted a systematic mapping review. We searched 7 major bibliographic databases from January 1990 to April 2020, and 2 reviewers screened the citations and extracted data independently from the included studies. We report our findings in line with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Results: Of the 126 retrieved RCTs, 115 (91.3%) were on VR and 11 (8.7%) were on AR. No RCT on MR in medical student education was found. Of the 115 studies on VR, 64 (55.6%) were on VR simulators, 30 (26.1%) on screen-based VR, 9 (7.8%) on VR patient simulations, and 12 (10.4%) on VR serious games. Most studies reported only a single outcome and immediate postintervention assessment data. Skills outcome was the most common outcome reported in studies on VR simulators (97%), VR patient simulations (100%), and AR (73%). Knowledge was the most common outcome reported in studies on screen-based VR (80%) and VR serious games (58%). Less common outcomes included participants’ attitudes, satisfaction, cognitive or mental load, learning efficacy, engagement or self-efficacy beliefs, emotional state, competency developed, and patient outcomes. At least one form of validity evidence was found in approximately half of the studies on VR simulators (55%), VR patient simulations (56%), VR serious games (58%), and AR (55%) and in a quarter of the studies on screen-based VR (27%). Most studies used assessment methods that were implemented in a nondigital format, such as paper-based written exercises or in-person assessments where examiners observed performance (72%). Conclusions: RCTs on VR and AR in medical education report a restricted range of outcomes, mostly skills and knowledge. The studies largely report immediate postintervention outcome data and use assessment methods that are in a nondigital format. Future RCTs should include a broader set of outcomes, report on the validity evidence of the measurement instruments used, and explore the use of assessments that are implemented digitally.

This is the abstract only. Read the full text free (open access) on the JMIR Serious Games website. JMIR is the leading ehealth publisher: fast peer-review - open access - high impact.

Background: People with Down syndrome face various learning challenges. Introducing new and enjoyable experiences in learning settings may improve learning outcomes. Immersive and interactive technologies such as virtual reality can be used to deliver rich visual experiences in classrooms. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and benefits of virtual reality exposure for people with Down syndrome in learning settings. Methods: To address this aim, we used a within-subjects design to assess the effect of a brief virtual reality drawing experience and conventional drawing experience on subsequent behavior in 16 participants. Results: Large positive effects were found for virtual reality drawing (t15=5.020, P<.001) and conventional drawing (t15=3.720, P=.002) in improving subsequent behavior in a learning setting. Irrespective of the intervention, the participant’s mood, attention, and overall behavior significantly improved. No significant differences were found between the interventions (t15=–0.648; P=.53). Conclusions: This study’s results are encouraging for researchers and educators interested in using virtual reality for people with Down syndrome, as virtual reality was found to be highly feasible. Recommendations are made for researchers and educators interested in providing virtual reality experiences for people with Down syndrome.

This is the abstract only. Read the full text free (open access) on the JMIR Serious Games website. JMIR is the leading ehealth publisher: fast peer-review - open access - high impact.

Background: Stroke has the highest disability-adjusted life-years lost in any disease, and approximately one-third of the patients get aphasia. Computers and tablets are innovative and aid in intensive treatments in speech rehabilitation for patients with aphasia. However, mechanical training limits the help to patients. Objective: This study aims to provide a framework for an integrated virtual reality (VR) app to provide speech rehabilitation for patients with aphasia. Methods: The content was generated through an in-depth literature review and discussion with experienced rehabilitation physicians and occupational therapists. We then conducted a 2-round Delphi study with 15 experts from hospitals and universities to rate the content using a 5-point Likert scale. The app was developed by an interdisciplinary team involving VR, medical science of rehabilitation, and therapeutic rehabilitation. Pilot usability testing of this novel app was conducted among 5 patients with aphasia, 5 healthy volunteers, 5 medical staff, and 2 VR experts. Results: We designed 4 modules of speech rehabilitation: oral expression, auditory comprehension, cognition, and comprehensive application. Our VR-based interactive and intelligent app was developed to provide an alternative option for patients with aphasia. Pilot usability testing revealed user satisfaction with the app. Conclusions: This study designed and tested a novel VR-based app for speech rehabilitation specifically adapted to patients with aphasia. This will guide other studies to develop a similar program or intelligent system in a clinical setting.

This is the abstract only. Read the full text free (open access) on the JMIR Serious Games website. JMIR is the leading ehealth publisher: fast peer-review - open access - high impact.

Background: Game-based learning appears to be a promising instructional method because of its engaging properties and positive effects on motivation and learning. There are numerous options to design game-based learning; however, there is little data-informed knowledge to guide the choice of the most effective game-based learning design for a given educational context. The effectiveness of game-based learning appears to be dependent on the degree to which players like the game. Hence, individual differences in game preferences should be taken into account when selecting a specific game-based learning design. Objective: We aimed to identify patterns in students’ perceptions of play and games—player types and their most important characteristics. Methods: We used Q methodology to identify patterns in opinions on game preferences. We recruited undergraduate medical and dental students to participate in our study and asked participants to sort and rank 49 statements on game preferences. These statements were derived from a prior focus group study and literature on game preferences. We used by-person factor analysis and varimax rotation to identify common viewpoints. Both factors and participants’ comments were used to interpret and describe patterns in game preferences. Results: From participants’ (n=102) responses, we identified 5 distinct patterns in game preferences: the social achiever, the explorer, the socializer, the competitor, and the troll. These patterns revolved around 2 salient themes: sociability and achievement. The 5 patterns differed regarding cheating, playing alone, story-telling, and the complexity of winning. Conclusions: The patterns were clearly interpretable, distinct, and showed that medical and dental students ranged widely in how they perceive play. Such patterns may suggest that it is important to take students’ game preferences into account when designing game-based learning and demonstrate that not every game-based learning-strategy fits all students. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to use a scientifically sound approach to identify player types. This can help future researchers and educators select effective game-based learning game elements purposefully and in a student-centered way.

This is the abstract only. Read the full text free (open access) on the JMIR Serious Games website. JMIR is the leading ehealth publisher: fast peer-review - open access - high impact.

Background: Serious games have been found to have enhancing and preventative effects on cognitive abilities in healthy older adults. Yet, there are few results on the effects in older seniors with age-related low cognitive impairments. Their special needs were considered when designing and using innovate technology in the area of prevention, which is especially relevant owing to the continuously aging population. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of a serious game on the cognitive abilities of seniors in order to potentially implement innovative resource-oriented technological interventions that can help to meet future challenges. Methods: In this controlled trial, we tested the serious game MemoreBox, which features modules specifically designed for seniors in nursing homes. Over a period of 1 year, we tested the cognitive abilities of 1000 seniors at 4 time points using the Mini-Mental Status Test. Only half of the participating seniors engaged with the serious game. Results: The study included an intervention group (n=56) and a control group (did not play; n=55). Based on the in-game data collection, a second intervention group (n=38) was identified within the original intervention group, which exactly followed the planned protocol. There were no noteworthy differences between the demographic and main variables of the overall sample. The large reduction in the sample size was due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic (drop-out rate: 88.9%). The CI was set at 5%. Mixed analysis of variance (ANOVA) between the cognitive abilities of the intervention and control groups did not show a statistically significant difference between time and group (F2.710,295.379=1.942; P=.13; partial η²=0.018). We noted approximately the same findings for mixed ANOVA between the cognitive abilities of the second intervention and control groups (F3,273=2.574; P=.054; partial η²=0.028). However, we did observe clear tendencies and a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups after 9 months of the intervention (t88.1=−2.394; P=.02). Conclusions: The results of this study show similarities with the current research situation. Moreover, the data indicate that the intervention can have an effect on the cognitive abilities of seniors, provided that they regularly play the serious game of MemoreBox. The small sample size means that the tendency toward improvement cannot be proven as statistically significant. However, the tendency shown warrants further research. Establishing an effective prevention tool as part of standard care in nursing homes by means of an easy-to-use serious game would be a considerable contribution to the weakened health care system in Germany as it would offer a means of activating senior citizens in partially and fully inpatient care facilities. Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00016633; https://tinyurl.com/2e4765nj

This is the abstract only. Read the full text free (open access) on the JMIR Serious Games website. JMIR is the leading ehealth publisher: fast peer-review - open access - high impact.