DIDACTIC POTENTIAL OF VIRTUAL REALITY TECHNOLOGIES IN TEACHING HUMAN ANATOMY
Keywords:
Virtual reality, human anatomy, medical educationAbstract
The integration of virtual reality (VR) technologies into medical education represents a significant advancement in the teaching of human anatomy. Traditional methods of anatomy instruction, which rely heavily on cadaver dissection and textbook illustrations, are increasingly being supplemented or replaced by immersive digital tools. This article explores the didactic potential of VR technologies in enhancing anatomical understanding, spatial orientation, and student engagement. Through analysis of recent studies and educational case models, the paper highlights how VR provides interactive 3D visualization, repeatable practice environments, and individualized learning experiences. The use of VR in anatomy education not only improves retention of knowledge but also addresses ethical, logistical, and financial challenges associated with conventional teaching methods. This technological shift paves the way for a more effective, safe, and student-centered medical curriculumReferences
1. Sang and S. Li, “A predictability analysis of
network traffic,” Computer Networks, vol. 39,
no. 4, pp. 329–345, 2020.
2. S. Chabaa, A. Zeroual, and J. Antar,
“Identification and prediction of internet traffic
using artificial neural networks,” Journal of
Intelligent Learning Systems and Applications,
vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 147–155, 2020.
3. R. Yamashita, M. Nishio, R. K. G. Do, and K.
Togashi, “Convolutional neural networks: an
overview and application in radiology,” Insights
into Imaging, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 611–629, 2018.
4. S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber, “Long shortterm memory,” Neural Computation, vol. 9, no.
8, pp. 1735–1780, 2020.
5. Y. Lv, Y. Duan, W. Kang et al., “Traffic flow
prediction with big data: a deep learning
approach,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, vol. 16, no. 2, pp.
865–873, 2019.
6. S. A. Jacob, J. Larter, A. Blair, and A. C. Boyter,
“Using forum theatre to teach communication
skills within an undergraduate pharmacy
curriculum: a qualitative evaluation of students’
feedback,” Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and
Learning, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 373–381, 2019.
7. F. Shaikh, K. Hendrata, B. Kolowitz, O. Awan,
R. Shrestha, and C. Deible, “Value-based
assessment of radiology reporting using
radiologist-referring physician two-way
feedback systema design thinking-based
approach,” Journal of Digital Imaging, vol. 30,
no. 3, pp. 267–274, 2017.
8. M. A. Eladl, M. E. Abdalla, and A. Ranade, “A
mixed method study to validate a two-way
feedback between student and faculty to
improve learning of anatomy,” Anatomy & Cell
Biology, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 98–104, 2018.
9. J. D. Orlander, D. H. Bor, and L. Strunin, “A
structured clinical feedback exercise as a
learning-to-teach practicum for medical
residents,” Academic Medicine, vol. 69, no. 1,
pp. 18–20, 2020.
10. P. M. Smeets, G. E. Lancioni, and S. Striefel,
“Stimulus manipulation versus delayed
feedback for teaching missing minuend
problems to difficult-to-teach students,”
Research in Developmental Disabilities, vol. 8,
no. 2, pp. 261–282, 2020.
11. A P. Sawatsky, J. R. Mikhael, A. D. Punatar et
al., “+e effects of deliberate practice and
feedback to teach standardized handoff
communication on the knowledge, attitudes,
and practices of first-year residents,” Teaching
and Learning in Medicine, vol. 25, no. 4, pp.
279–284, 2018.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
