Quasi-experimental study reveals higher knowledge and satisfaction among Family Medicine residents after a virtual radiology course, indicating effective learning methods.
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate a structured basic radiology course for Family Medicine residents delivered in a 3-dimensional (3D) virtual environment (Second Life). We hypothesized that participation would be associated with higher post-course knowledge test scores and high learner satisfaction.Methods: A quasi-experimental multi-cohort pretest–posttest study was conducted across 3 consecutive cohorts of Family Medicine residents in Spain in 2019. Ninety-six participants engaged in a 15-day course combining synchronous and asynchronous activities. Sixty-five participants provided paired pre- and post-intervention knowledge assessments, which were analyzed using paired t-tests. Learner satisfaction was evaluated using a structured questionnaire with Likert-scale items, numerical ratings (0–10), and open-ended responses. Pre- and post-test scores and ratings were compared using paired t-tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for Likert-scale data. Qualitative data from open-ended responses were analyzed using thematic coding.Results: Participants had significantly higher post-course knowledge test scores, increasing from 47.4±11.6 to 58.2±11.9 (mean difference, 10.8; P<0.001; paired-sample Cohen’s d [dz]=0.67). High agreement was observed across most satisfaction items, with median scores ranging from 4 to 5. Content relevance, usefulness for clinical practice, and instructor performance received the highest ratings. Lower scores were observed for peer interaction and platform usability.Conclusion: A structured radiology course delivered in a 3D virtual environment was associated with higher immediate post-course knowledge test scores and high learner satisfaction among Family Medicine residents. The findings support the feasibility of repeated course delivery, although controlled studies are warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pino-Postigo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: