Abstract
BACKGROUND: The authors had previously developed AnaVu, a low-resource 3D visualization tool for stereoscopic/monoscopic projection of 3D models generated from pre-segmented MRI neuroimaging data. However, its utility in neuroanatomical education compared to conventional methods (specifically whether the stereoscopic or monoscopic mode is more effective) is still unclear. METHODS: A three-limb randomized controlled trial was designed. A sample (n = 152) from the 2022 cohort of MBBS students at Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram (GMCT), was randomly selected from those who gave informed consent. After a one-hour introductory lecture on brainstem anatomy and a dissection session, students were randomized to three groups (S - Stereo; M - Mono and C - Control). S was given a 20-min demonstration on the brainstem lesson module in AnaVu in stereoscopic mode. M was given the same demonstration, but in monoscopic mode. The C group was taught using white-board drawn diagrams. Pre-intervention and post-intervention tests for four domains (basic recall, analytical, radiological anatomy and diagram-based questions) were conducted before and after the intervention. Cognitive loads were measured using a pre-validated tool. The groups were then swapped -S→ M, M →S and C→S, and they were asked to compare the modes. RESULTS: For basic recall questions, there was a statistically significant increase in the pre/post-intervention score difference of the S group when compared to the M group [p = 0.03; post hoc analysis, Bonferroni corrections applied] and the C group [p = 0.001; ANOVA test; post hoc analysis, Bonferroni corrections applied]. For radiological anatomy questions, the difference was significantly higher for S compared to C [p < 0.001; ANOVA test; post hoc analysis, Bonferroni corrections applied]. Cognitive load scores showed increased mean germane load for S (33.28 ± 5.35) and M (32.80 ± 7.91) compared with C (28.18 ± 8.17). Subjective feedbacks showed general advantage for S and M compared to C. Out of the S and M swap cohorts, 79/102 preferred S, 13/102 preferred M, and 6/102 preferred both. CONCLUSIONS: AnaVu tool seems to be effective for learning neuroanatomy. The specific advantage seen when taught with stereoscopy in basic recall and radiological anatomy learning shows the importance of how visualization mode influences neuroanatomy learning. Since both S and M are preferred in subjective feedbacks, these results have implications in choosing methods (stereoscopic - needs 3D projectors; monoscopic - needs web based or hand-held devices) to scale AnaVu for anatomy teaching in medical colleges in India. Since stereoscopic projection is technically novel and cost considerations are slightly higher compared to monoscopic projection, the specific advantages and disadvantages of each are relevant in the Indian medical education scenario.