Rationale and Objectives
Virtual worlds have a remarkable potential for effective teaching and learning, providing immersive, realistic, and engaging online events. Previous studies have explored online education of health professionals in Second Life (SL), the most widely used virtual world, but none of the previous learning experiences were related to radiology. The purpose of this study was to explore the potential use of SL for undergraduate radiology education and the involvement of students in SL learning activities.
Materials and Methods
We delivered a 4-week voluntary undergraduate radiology education program in SL, based on synchronous sessions and asynchronous tasks, with two modalities: introduction to basic radiology for first-cycle (first- to third-year) students and case-based clinical radiology for second-cycle (fourth- to sixth-year) students. Participants completed an evaluation questionnaire about the experiences after the learning program.
Results
Forty-six students (20 first-cycle and 26 second-cycle) participated in this study. They found the contents of the course appropriate (mean ≥ 4.53/5), the initiative interesting, and the environment attractive (mean ≥ 4.32/5), and they were willing to participate in future SL experiences (mean ≥ 4.63/5). All students highly rated the organization, the content, the benefit to their medical education, and the professor (mean ≥ 9.05/10).
Conclusion
Online radiology education using SL is feasible and well received by medical students of all year groups. The students participated and engaged in this activity very positively and rated the experience highly. The potential of using SL for radiology education includes promising expectations regarding collaborative learning and gamification.
Introduction
A virtual world is a computer-based simulated environment, as well as an online community and a three-dimensional virtual space that simulates reality in which the user interacts with contents and visitors without having to physically move to a common place. In 2003, the company Linden Research Inc. created Second Life (SL), one of the most well-known and widely used virtual worlds, a virtual community developed by its own users . To join SL, the user must create an account, choose an avatar, and download the SL viewer or any other SL-compatible viewer to display the virtual world on his or her computer screen. Almost all the objects that are visible in SL are built from primitive three-dimensional geometric shapes called prims. Prims can assume any desirable shape and can look any way desired by applying selected textures to their surfaces. They can do things via internal scripts written in Linden Scripting Language, or share media, for example, displaying a web page on a face . The user interacts with the virtual world by means of his or her avatar. Interactions include viewing the world from different perspectives and focuses, touching objects, answering to displayed menus originated from Linden Scripting Language scripts, moving, adopting gestures, and communicating with others.
Virtual worlds have a remarkable potential to be used for effective teaching and learning , providing the possibility to create immersive, realistic, and engaging online events that can provide high-quality medical education to health-related users in remote locations . There are a wide range of health-related activities on SL , most of them dedicated to patient education or increased awareness about health issues, but there are also training sites that offer education by means of classrooms, discussions, lectures, simulation, and patient interaction. In fact, professional and academic education in health care contains the largest number of papers in a systematic literature review regarding the use of three-dimensional virtual worlds .
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Materials and Methods
The Medical Master Island
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Recruitment
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
The Course
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
TABLE 1
Attendance to Sessions and Completion of Tasks Along the Project
First-cycle Students Second-cycle Students_P_ \* All Students Day 1 Introduction to Second Life 19/20 (95%) 22/26 (84%) .10 41/46 (89%) Day 2 Introduction to radiographic studies Chest X-ray interpretation workshop 19/20 (95%) 22/26 (85%) .10 41/46 (89%) Day 3 Introduction to ultrasonography and Nuclear Medicine Abdominal X-ray interpretation workshop 18/20 (90%) 25/26 (96%) .08 43/46 (93%) Day 4 Introduction to CT and MRI Musculoskeletal X-ray interpretation workshop 18/20 (90%) 20/26 (77%) .09 38/46 (83%) All days74/80 (92%)89/104 (85.6%).01163/184 (88.6%) Task 1 Identify radiological studies with and without contrast (10 cases) Chest X-rays clinical interpretation (10 cases) 20/20 (100%) 24/26 (92%) .10 44/46 (96%) Task 2 Identify anatomical structures in radiological studies (12 cases) Abdominal X-rays clinical interpretation (10 cases) 20/20 (100%) 24/26 (92%) .10 44/46 (96%) Task 3 Variability in abdominal radiographs (20 cases) 20/20 (100%) 23/26 (88%) .06 43/46 (93%) Task 4 Identification and description of sectional studies (10 cases) Musculoskeletal X-rays clinical interpretation (10 cases) 17/20 (85%) 23/26 (88%) .21 40/46 (87%) All tasks95/100 (95%)117/130 (90.0%).01212/230 (92.2%)
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Evaluation
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Statistical Analysis
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Results
Participation in the Activities
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Asynchronous Tasks Outcomes
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
TABLE 2
Results of the Asynchronous Tasks in Terms of Qualification Normalized to 10 Points
First-cycle Students Second-cycle Students First and Second Year Third Year_P_ \* Fourth Year Fifth and Sixth Year_P_ \* Task 1 4.9 ± 2.1 7.6 ± 1.7 .01 3.1 ± 0.6 4.4 ± 1.8 .03 Task 2 3.2 ± 1.1 3.7 ± 0.9 .31 3.3 ± 1.5 6.2 ± 1.7 <.001 Task 3 3.3 ± 1.4 5.0 ± 1.7 .03 5.0 ± 1.3 5.5 ± 1.5 .36 Task 4 4.9 ± 0.9 6.9 ± 1.3 .01 4.2 ± 1.0 6.7 ± 2.0 .01
Data are mean ± standard deviation.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Students’ Perception of the Project
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
TABLE 3
Results of the Questionnaire About the Experience
First-cycle Students Second-cycle Students_P_ \* About Second Life † The initiative has seemed interesting to you 4.68 ± 0.58 4.96 ± 0.21 .04 The island environment has looked attractive to you 4.32 ± 1.11 4.39 ± 0.84 .80 The under-graduate building has seemed appropriate to you 4.37 ± 1.12 4.91 ± 0.29 .03 You knew about Second Life before this experience 1.32 ± 0.82 1.52 ± 1.12 .51 You manage easily enough in Second Life 3.37 ± 1.21 3.52 ± 0.99 .65 The tasks of creation and management of your avatar have been easy 3.47 ± 0.90 3.91 ± 1.11 .21 Your computer has enough requirements to run Second Life without problems 3.95 ± 1.31 3.00 ± 1.65 .049 Your Internet connection is fast enough to run Second Life without problems 4.37 ± 0.90 3.22 ± 1.51 .01 About the project † The contents of the course have seemed appropriates for your medical education 4.53 ± 0.90 4.87 ± 0.34 .10 The contents of the course are very difficult for your current level of knowledge 3.63 ± 1.01 2.83 ± 1.23 .03 You will be able to participate in other experience in Second Life during this course 4.05 ± 1.35 4.13 ± 0.97 .83 You will be able to participate in other experience in Second Life during next courses 4.63 ± 0.68 4.65 ± 0.57 .92 The intervention of the professor has been adequate 4.95 ± 0.23 5.00 ± 0.00 .28 The planning of the course has seemed interesting to you 4.47 ± 0.70 4.74 ± 0.54 .17 Your participation has been very active 3.79 ± 1.18 3.96 ± 0.98 .62 The contact with your mates in Second Life is very beneficial for your training 4.16 ± 1.26 4.00 ± 0.95 .65 Qualification the project ‡ The experience globally 8.74 ± 1.19 9.48 ± 0.79 .02 The organization of the project 9.05 ± 1.22 9.30 ± 0.82 .43 The island environment 8.32 ± 2.14 8.83 ± 1.40 .36 The educational contents 9.05 ± 1.03 9.26 ± 0.92 .49 The profit for your education 9.05 ± 0.97 9.26 ± 0.96 .49 The professor 9.58 ± 0.77 9.83 ± 0.39 .18 The interaction with your mates 8.42 ± 1.68 8.57 ± 1.80 .79 The presential sessions 8.42 ± 1.68 9.13 ± 0.97 .09 The tasks 7.37 ± 2.06 8.35 ± 1.19 .06 The connectivity 7.89 ± 2.56 8.13 ± 1.32 .70
Data are mean ± standard deviation.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Discussion
Principal Results
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Potential of SL for Undergraduate Radiology Learning
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Students’ Involvement in SL Activities (Participation and Engagement)
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Students’ Perception and Evaluation of the Project
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Limitations
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Comparison to Prior Work
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Conclusions and Future Work
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Acknowledgment
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
References
1. Mahaley S., Teigland R.: Advancing learning through virtual worlds.Murugesan S.Handbook of research on Web 2.0, 3.0, and x.0: technologies, business, and social applications. Hershey: Information Science Reference.2010.pp. 556-572.
2. Zhang P., Ma X., Pan Z., et. al.: Multi-agent cooperative reinforcement learning in 3D virtual world.Tan Y.Shi Y.Tan K.C.Advances in swarm intelligence. First international conference, ICSI 2010, Part I.2010.Springer-VerlagBerlin:pp. 731-739.
3. Linden Research Inc : Second Life Main Webpage. Available at http://www.secondlife.com
4. Ahem N., Wink D.M.: Virtual learning environments: second life. Nurse Educ 2010; 35: pp. 225-227.
5. Boulos N.M., Hetherington L., Wheeler S.: Second life: an overview of the potential of 3-D virtual worlds in medical and health education. Health Info Libr J 2007; 24: pp. 233-245.
6. Hansen H.M., Murray P.J., Erdley W.S.: The potential of 3-D virtual worlds in professional nursing education. Stud Health Technol Inform 2009; 146: pp. 582-586.
7. Wiecha J., Heyden R., Sternthal E., et. al.: Learning in a virtual world: experience with using second life for medical education. J Med Internet Res 2010; 12: pp. e1.
8. Melus-Palazon E., Bartolome-Moreno C., Palacin-Arbues J.C., et. al.: Experience with using second life for medical education in a family and community medicine education unit. BMC Med Educ 2012; 12: pp. 30.
9. Miller M., Jensen R.: Avatars in nursing: an integrative review. Nurse Educ 2014; 39: pp. 38-41.
10. Beard L., Wilson K., Morra D., et. al.: A survey of health-related activities on second life. J Med Internet Res 2009; 11: pp. e17.
11. Ghanbarzadeh R., Ghapanchi A.H., Blumenstein M., et. al.: A decade of research on the use of three-dimensional virtual worlds in health care: a systematic literature review. J Med Internet Res 2014; 16: pp. e47.
12. Phillips A.W., Smith S.G., Straus C.M.: The role of radiology in preclinical anatomy: a critical review of the past, present, and future. Acad Radiol 2013; 20: pp. 297-305.
13. Salajegheh A., Jahangiri A., Dolan-Evans E., Pakneshan S.: A combination of traditional learning and e-learning can be more effective on radiological interpretation skills in medical students: a pre- and post-intervention study. BMC Med Educ 2016; 16: pp. 46.
14. den Harder A.M., Frijlingh M., Ravesloot C.J., et. al.: The importance of human-computer interaction in radiology e-learning. J Digit Imaging 2016; 29: pp. 195-205.
15. Zafar S., Safdar S., Zafar A.N.: Evaluation of use of e-learning in undergraduate radiology education: a review. Eur J Radiol 2014; 83: pp. 2277-2287.
16. Linden Research Inc : The Medical Master Island Second Life maps location (SLURL). Available at http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Medical%20Master%20Island/121/87/23
17. Rosal M.C., Heyden R., Mejilla R., et. al.: Design and methods for a comparative effectiveness pilot study: virtual world vs. face-to-face diabetes self-management. JMIR Res Protoc 2012; 1: pp. e24.
18. Sendra-Portero F., Muñoz Núñez C.F.: Online training tools in radiology. Radiologia 2011; 53: pp. 498-505.
19. Linden Research Inc : Art destination in Second Life. Available at http://secondlife.com/destinations/arts
20. Huang Y.-C., Han S.R.: An immersive virtual reality museum via second life. Extending art appreciation from 2D to 3D.Stephanidis C.HCI International 2014 - Posters’ Extended Abstracts. International Conference, HCI International 2014, Heraklion, Crete, June 22–27, 2014. Proceedings, Part I.2014.Springer International PublishingSwitzerland:pp. 579-584.
21. Sendra-Portero F., Torales-Chaparro O.E., Ruiz-Gómez M.J.: Medical students’ skills in image interpretation before and after training: a comparison between 3rd-year and 6th-year students from two different medical curricula. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: pp. 3931-3935.
22. Milles K.A.: Diagnostic imaging in undergraduate medical education: an expanding role. Clin Radiol 2005; 60: pp. 742-745.
23. Heptonstall N.B., Ali T., Mankad K.: Integrating radiology and anatomy teaching in medical education in the UK-the evidence, current trends, and future scope. Acad Radiol 2016; 23: pp. 521-526.
24. Kok E.M., de Bruin A.B., Leppink J., et. al.: Case comparisons: an efficient way of learning radiology. Acad Radiol 2015; 22: pp. 1226-1235.
25. Fredricks J.A., McColskey W.: The measurement of student engagement: a comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments.Christenson S.L.Reschly A.L.Wylie C.Handbook of Research on Student Engagement.2012.Springer Science+Business Media, LLCNew York:pp. 763-782.
26. De Lucia A., Francese R., Passero I., et. al.: Development and evaluation of a virtual campus on Second Life: the case of SecondDMI. Computn Educ 2009; 52: pp. 220-233.
27. Pusic M.V., Chiaramonte R., Gladding S., et. al.: Accuracy of self-monitoring during learning of radiograph interpretation. Med Educ 2015; 49: pp. 838-846.
28. Schaffer M.A., Tiffany J.M., Kantack K., et. al.: Second Life(®) virtual learning in public health nursing. J Nurs Educ 2016; 55: pp. 536-540.
29. Creutzfeldt J., Hedman L., Felländer-Tsai L.: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation training by avatars: a qualitative study of medical students’ experiences using a multiplayer virtual world. JMIR Serious Games 2016; 4: pp. e22.
30. Richardson A., Hazzard M., Challman S.D., et. al.: A “Second Life” for gross anatomy: applications for multiuser virtual environments in teaching the anatomical sciences. Anat Sci Educ 2011; 4: pp. 39-43.
31. Gazave C.M., Hatcher E.R.: Evaluating the use of Second Life™ for virtual team-based learning in an online undergraduate anatomy course. Med Sci Educ 2017; 27: pp. 217-227.