The novelty of three-dimensional visualization technology (3DVT), such as virtual reality (VR), has captured the interest of many educational institutions. This study's objectives were to (1) assess how VR and physical models impact anatomy learning, (2) determine the effect of visuospatial ability on anatomy learning from VR and physical models, and (3) evaluate the impact of a VR familiarization phase on learning. This within-subjects, crossover study recruited 78 undergraduate students who studied anatomical structures at both physical and VR models and were tested on their knowledge immediately and 48 hours after learning. There were no significant differences in test scores between the two modalities on both testing days. After grouping participants on visuospatial ability, low visuospatial ability learners performed significantly worse on anatomy knowledge tests compared to their high visuospatial ability counterparts when learning from VR immediately (P = 0.001, d = 1.515) and over the long-term (P = 0.003, d = 1.279). In contrast, both low and high visuospatial ability groups performed similarly well when learning from the physical model and tested immediately after learning (P = 0.067) and over the long-term (P = 0.107). These results differ from current literature which indicates that learners with low visuospatial ability are aided by 3DVT. Familiarizing participants with VR before the learning phase had no impact on learning (P = 0.967). This study demonstrated that VR may be detrimental to low visuospatial ability students, whereas physical models may allow all students, regardless of their visuospatial abilities, to learn similarly well. Anat Sci Educ 14: 788-798.

No abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying public health measures have exacerbated many risk factors for depression in older adulthood. The objectives of the current study are: (1) to determine the risk of incident and recurrent depression during the COVID-19 pandemic among those with, or without, a history of depression; and (2) to identify factors that were predictive of depression in these two groups. The study population included 22,622 participants of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging who provided data at baseline (2011–2015), follow-up (2015–2018), and twice during the pandemic (April–May 2020, September–December 2020). The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-10) was used to classify individuals with depression. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of depression during COVID across a series of risk factors. Individuals with a history of depression had four times the risk of depression during the pandemic when compared to those without a history of depression, even after controlling for relevant covariates. Other factors associated with depression during the pandemic include being female, having fewer savings, and experiencing COVID-19 related stressors, such as health stressors, difficulties accessing resources, and family conflict. Clinicians working with older adults should consider interventions to support high-risk groups, such as those with recurrent depression.

Despite a scarcity in substantive evidence, virtual reality (VR) is heralded as the future of anatomy education. Recent research in our lab suggests that VR headsets are substantially inferior to traditional plastic models as educational tools. This effect appears to be mediated by the VR headsets' inability to create convincing stereopsis. Our study aims to investigate if familiarization with the VR environment improves performance. When presented with a new learning environment (e.g., a room in VR), one may encounter a “novelty effect” where the new environment demands focus and distracts from learning. An introduction to the VR environment prior to learning could minimize this effect. Therefore, we hypothesize that familiarization will improve test scores. Undergraduate university students with no prior formal anatomy education (n=50) will be randomized to a familiarization or non‐familiarization group. The former group is allowed to orient themselves with a VR car engine model, ad libitum. Then, both groups will undergo a learning phase with a VR pelvis model for 10 minutes. Participants will be tested using a 15‐item evaluation, consisting of an equal amount of nominal, spatial, and functional questions, immediately and 48 hours after learning. Preliminary data (n=8) suggest that there are currently no statistically significant differences in short‐ or long‐term evaluation scores (p=0.109, p=0.254, respectively) between the familiarization and non‐familizarization groups. If this trend persists through completion of the study, it would suggest that a familiarization phase does not improve test scores. Data collection and analysis are anticipated to be completed in January 2019. Gaining an understanding of which factors influence VR learning allows it to become a more effective, evidence‐based tool for anatomy education.Support or Funding InformationSelf‐funded.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.

Three‐dimensional (3D) visualization technology such as virtual reality (VR) has the ability to illustrate and replicate physical dissection, and its novelty has captured the interest of many educational institutions. Unfortunately, the testing of 3D technology lags behind development, and most research is confined to case studies. This study's objective is to (1) analyze the short‐term and long‐term efficacy of VR dissection technology compared to an interactive, physical dissective model, and (2) determine if other factors, such as spatial ability, impacts the effectiveness of learning anatomy from VR models. Based on previous research in our lab, static physical models have been shown to be superior to VR models when learning anatomy. Thus, the physical dissection model is hypothesized to perform better in teaching anatomy. The interactive, physical model consists of a 3D‐printed bony pelvis and fabric perineal structures to effectively display the dissections. The physical model was scanned to produce an identical VR replica which is displayed on an HTC Vive. This crossover study will use undergraduate McMaster University students (n=52) with no formal anatomy education. Participants will be asked to learn anatomical structures from both physical and VR models, and be tested on the knowledge from each model in two separate tests. After 48 hours, they will be tested to determine if either model exhibits better long‐term retention. Tests will include nominal, functional, and spatial questions to assess recognition, critical thinking, and spatial awareness. Preliminary data (n=13) suggests that there is no statistically significant difference between either models when learning anatomy during short‐term testing (p=0.24) and long‐term testing (p=0.054). On short‐term retention tests, participants are receiving an average score of 7(3) and 6(2) out of 15 when learning from the VR and physical models, respectively. During long‐term testing, participants are achieving an average score of 7(3) and 5(2) out of 15 when also learning from the VR and physical models, respectively. Data collection is underway and expected to yield complete results by January 2019. Data from additional participants will further elucidate the impact of VR and physical dissection models on student learning. These results could help guide and improve the development of future anatomy education programs.Support or Funding InformationThis project was self‐funded.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.