Background: Cadaveric dissection remains foundational in anatomy education, while virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a potential complementary or alternative modality. This randomized, curriculum-embedded modified AB/BA crossover study evaluated VR-based versus cadaver-based anatomy tutoring among post-baccalaureate students enrolled in a healthcare master’s program. Methods: Participants completed four weeks of tutoring using one modality followed by four weeks using the alternate modality. Outcomes included embedded written examination scores, cadaver-based practical examination scores, final course grades, and learner perceptions measured through pre-, mid-, and post-intervention surveys. Eighteen students completed the full study. Results: No significant differences were observed between VR-based and cadaver-based tutoring for written examinations, practical examinations, or final course grades (all p > 0.05). Learners rated VR-based tutoring as significantly more helpful at the first and second post-intervention timepoints (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0020). Confidence was comparable between modalities, while enjoyment was higher for the cadaver lab at the second post-intervention timepoint (p = 0.0120). Conclusions: No statistically significant differences in short-term anatomy learning outcomes were detected between VR-based and cadaver-based near-peer tutoring within a cadaver-based curriculum, and both modalities were successfully delivered by student tutors. While the small sample size limits definitive conclusions, either modality, or a combination of both, may represent a feasible supplemental instruction tool based on institutional resources, space, donor availability, and learner needs without significantly compromising the student experience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tolson et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: