ArticleJMIR XR and spatial computing2025
Understanding the Views of Health Care Professionals on the Usability and Utility of Virtual Reality Multidisciplinary Team Meetings: Usability and Utility Study.
Article in JMIR XR and spatial computing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of repeated exposure to an identical multi-user virtual reality anaphylaxis scenario on paramedic trainee performance: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Task Requirements, Workflow Processes and Technological Constraints in Virtual Multidisciplinary Tumour Board Meetings: Insights for Extended Reality-Based Solutions in Thoracic Oncology.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are one of the facilitators that enhance knowledge sharing among health care professionals. However, organizing a face-to-face MDT meeting to discuss patient treatment plans can be time-consuming. Virtual reality software is widely used in health care nowadays to save time and protect lives. Therefore, the use of virtual reality multidisciplinary team (VRMDT) meeting software may help enhance knowledge sharing between health care professionals and make meetings more efficient. Objective: The objectives of this study were to introduce VRMDT software for enhancing knowledge sharing and to evaluate the feasibility and usability of the VRMDT for use by professionals in health care institutions. Methods: We invited participants from The University of Manchester Faculty for Biology, Medicine, and Health who had a health care background. As this was the first stage of software development, individuals who did not usually attend MDT meetings were also invited via email to participate in this study. Participants evaluated VRMDT using a Meta Quest 3 headset, and software developed using the Unity platform. The software contained an onboarding tutorial that taught the participants how to select items, load and rotate 3D Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine files, talk to a generative artificial intelligence-supported avatar, and make notes. After the evaluation (approximately 15 min), participants received an electronic survey using the Qualtrics survey tool (Qualtrics International Inc) to score the usability and feasibility of the software by responding to the 10-item system usability scale, and 12-point heuristic evaluation questions with Neilsen severity rating. Results: A total of 12 participants, including 4 health informatics, 3 with a nursing background, 2 medical doctors, 1 radiologist, and 2 biostatisticians, participated in the study. The most common age bracket of participants was 20-30 years (6/12, 50%). Most of the respondents had no experience with virtual reality, either in educational or entertainment settings. The VRMDT received a mean usability score of 72.7 (range between 68 and 80.3), earning an overall "good" rating grade. The mean score of single items in the heuristic evaluation questionnaires was less than 1 out of 4 (the overall mean was 0.6), which indicates that only minor problems were encountered when using this software. Overall, the participant's feedback was good with highlighted issues including a poor internet connection and the quality of the generative artificial intelligence response. Conclusions: VRMDT software (developed by Sentira
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.