Department of Anatomy, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Anat Sci Educ. 2021 Nov;14(6):774-787. doi: 10.1002/ase.2022. Epub 2020 Dec 8.
Technological advancements have made it possible to create realistic virtual representations of the real world, although it is unclear in medical education whether high physical fidelity is required in virtual learning resources (VLRs). This study, therefore, aimed to compare the effectiveness of high-fidelity (HF) and low-fidelity (LF) VLRs for learning anatomy. For this study, HF and LF VLRs were developed for liver anatomy and participants were voluntarily recruited from two cohorts (cohorts 1 and 2). Knowledge outcomes were measured through pre- and post-tests, task outcomes including activity score and completion time were recorded and participants' perceptions of the VLRs were surveyed. A total of 333 participants (165 HF and 168 LF) took part in this study. Knowledge outcomes were higher for the HF activity in cohort 1 and for the LF activity in cohort 2, although not significantly. There were no significant differences in activity score within either cohort, although completion time was significantly longer for the HF activity in cohort 1 (P = 0.001). There were no significant differences within either cohort in perceptions of the VLRs regarding usefulness for reviewing conceptual knowledge, esthetics, quality, mental effort experienced, or future use, although the LF VLR was scored significantly higher regarding the value for understanding in cohort 1 (P = 0.027).This study suggests that high physical fidelity is not necessarily required for anatomy VLRs, although may potentially be valuable for improving knowledge outcomes. Also, level of prior knowledge may be an important factor when considering the physical fidelity of anatomy VLRs.
技术进步使得创建真实世界的逼真虚拟表示成为可能，尽管在医学教育中尚不清楚虚拟学习资源（VLR）是否需要高物理保真度。因此，本研究旨在比较高保真度（HF）和低保真度（LF）VLR 学习解剖学的效果。为此，本研究为肝脏解剖学开发了 HF 和 LF VLR，并从两个队列（队列 1 和队列 2）中自愿招募参与者。知识成果通过前测和后测进行衡量，记录任务成果，包括活动得分和完成时间，并调查参与者对 VLR 的看法。共有 333 名参与者（HF 组 165 名，LF 组 168 名）参与了这项研究。在队列 1 中，HF 活动的知识成果较高，而在队列 2 中 LF 活动的知识成果较高，但并不显著。在任一队列中，活动得分均无显著差异，尽管队列 1 的 HF 活动的完成时间明显更长（P=0.001）。在任一队列中，对于 VLR 在复习概念知识、美观、质量、体验的心理努力或未来使用方面的有用性的看法没有显著差异，尽管 LF VLR 在队列 1 中对于理解的价值的评分明显更高（P=0.027）。本研究表明，高物理保真度对于解剖学 VLR 并非必需，但对于提高知识成果可能具有价值。此外，在考虑解剖学 VLR 的物理保真度时，先前知识水平可能是一个重要因素。
