Evidence Hub

Virtual reality simulation with eye-tracking feedback versus mannequin-based training for situational awareness in trauma management under simulated emergency department interruptions in Iran: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Emadi N, Mojtahedzadeh R, Allameh SF, Basiri K, Mohammadi A

Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 2026

18 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Purpose: To primarily examine the feasibility of implementing eye-tracking-based feedback within a virtual reality (VR) trauma simulation with realistically simulated emergency department interruptions, and to explore preliminary changes in situational awareness (SA) (primary outcome), Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) performance, and trauma-management errors (exploratory outcomes) compared with conventional mannequin-based simulation.

Methods: In this pilot randomized pretest-posttest study, 35 medical interns were assigned to VR training with eye-tracking heatmap feedback (n=17) or mannequin-based training with instructor verbal feedback (n=18). SA (modified Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique), ATLS checklist performance, and trauma-management error scores were measured before and after the intervention. Within-group changes were tested with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and between-group differences were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test on change scores (Δ=post-pre), with effect sizes reported as r.

Results: Baseline pretest performance did not differ significantly between the groups. Both groups improved in SA and ATLS performance (all P<0.001) and reduced error scores (VR: P=0.004; mannequin: P<0.001). In exploratory between-group comparisons, the VR group showed numerically greater improvements in SA (mean change 6.59 vs. 3.11; P=0.006, r=0.46), ATLS performance (22.12 vs. 8.22; P=0.003, r=0.48), and error reduction (-9.36 vs. -3.61; P=0.005,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 18 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free