Engagement is not encoding: Outcome alignment determines the effectiveness of mixed reality in medical education

Mixed Reality (MR) technologies are increasingly discussed as a resource-efficient option to support high-quality teaching in medical education. Yet the literature is still dominated by feasibility studies and systematic reviews; controlled comparative studies remain less common. The study aimed to assess whether mixed reality provides a learning benefit in a single, time-limited teaching session and to characterise students' perceptions and how these change from pre-to post-session. An exploratory questionnaire was developed in advance based on semi-structured, guide-based interviews (n = 15). Subsequently, 46 medical and dental students were randomised to either an intervention group (mixed reality; n = 23) or a control group (script-based conventional teaching; n = 23). After the respective learning unit (a clinically oriented anatomy session), a knowledge recall test was administered. Subjective ratings in the domains of prior knowledge, educational relevance, visualisation, understanding, interaction, technical aspects and critical feedback were collected using pre- and post-questionnaires to capture changes in perception and the extent of opinion change. In the between-group comparison, no consistent differences were observed pre- or post-intervention, nor with regard to the extent of opinion change. Within-group pre-post analyses assessed perception change. In the control group, significant pre-post changes were found in 6 of 7 domains (prior knowledge p < 0.001; educational relevance p < 0.001; visualisation p < 0.001; understanding p < 0.001; interaction p = 0.023; technical aspects p = 0.004). In contrast, in the critical feedback domain, a significant difference was observed only in the intervention group (p = 0.029). In the knowledge recall test, the control group performed significantly better (p = 0.008). These findings suggest that immersive technologies do not automatically enhance learning performance. Rather, their effectiveness appears to depend on the alignment between medium characteristics, cognitive demands, and the specific learning outcomes assessed. Engagement and interactivity alone may not translate into improved short-term recall, particularly when outcomes primarily measure factual retrieval.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Published
2026-06-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2026.104618
Primary Topic
Augmented Reality Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Engagement is not encoding: Outcome alignment determines the effectiveness of mixed reality in medical education

Aida Parviz, Michael Schwerter, Majeed Rana, Nadia Karnatz et al.
Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Augmented Reality Applications
article

Engagement is not encoding: Outcome alignment determines the effectiveness of mixed reality in medical education

Aida Parviz, Michael Schwerter, Majeed Rana, Nadia Karnatz, Angela Rosa Caso, Shufang Liu, David Kaffka, Raymond Wong
article en

Abstract

Mixed Reality (MR) technologies are increasingly discussed as a resource-efficient option to support high-quality teaching in medical education. Yet the literature is still dominated by feasibility studies and systematic reviews; controlled comparative studies remain less common. The study aimed to assess whether mixed reality provides a learning benefit in a single, time-limited teaching session and to characterise students' perceptions and how these change from pre-to post-session. An exploratory questionnaire was developed in advance based on semi-structured, guide-based interviews (n = 15). Subsequently, 46 medical and dental students were randomised to either an intervention group (mixed reality; n = 23) or a control group (script-based conventional teaching; n = 23). After the respective learning unit (a clinically oriented anatomy session), a knowledge recall test was administered. Subjective ratings in the domains of prior knowledge, educational relevance, visualisation, understanding, interaction, technical aspects and critical feedback were collected using pre- and post-questionnaires to capture changes in perception and the extent of opinion change. In the between-group comparison, no consistent differences were observed pre- or post-intervention, nor with regard to the extent of opinion change. Within-group pre-post analyses assessed perception change. In the control group, significant pre-post changes were found in 6 of 7 domains (prior knowledge p < 0.001; educational relevance p < 0.001; visualisation p < 0.001; understanding p < 0.001; interaction p = 0.023; technical aspects p = 0.004). In contrast, in the critical feedback domain, a significant difference was observed only in the intervention group (p = 0.029). In the knowledge recall test, the control group performed significantly better (p = 0.008). These findings suggest that immersive technologies do not automatically enhance learning performance. Rather, their effectiveness appears to depend on the alignment between medium characteristics, cognitive demands, and the specific learning outcomes assessed. Engagement and interactivity alone may not translate into improved short-term recall, particularly when outcomes primarily measure factual retrieval.

Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial SurgeryVol. 54(9)
Miltenyi Biotec (Germany) (DE), National University of Singapore (SG), Universität Ulm (DE), Australian Dental Association (AU), Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein (BR), Düsseldorf University Hospital (DE), Helios Klinikum Krefeld (DE), Klinikum Mutterhaus der Borromäerinnen (DE), National University Hospital (SG), University Hospital Ulm (DE), Brainlab (Germany) (DE), Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE), Hochschule Düsseldorf University of Applied Sciences (DE)
Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Innovation, Digitalisierung und Energie des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Augmented Reality Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.