What is the Current State of Extended Reality Use in Otolaryngology Training? A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: To map current literature on the educational use of extended reality (XR) in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (OHNS) to inform teaching and research. STUDY DESIGN: Scoping Review. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted, identifying literature through MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Web of Science databases. Findings were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping review checklist. Studies were included if they involved OHNS trainees or medical students who used XR for an educational purpose in OHNS. XR was defined as: fully-immersive virtual reality (VR) using head-mounted displays (HMDs), non-immersive and semi-immersive VR, augmented reality (AR), or mixed reality (MR). Data on device use were extracted, and educational outcomes were analyzed according to Kirkpatrick's evaluation framework. RESULTS: Of the 1,434 unique abstracts identified, 40 articles were included. All articles reported on VR; none discussed AR or MR. Twenty-nine articles were categorized as semi-immersive, none used occlusive HMDs therefore, none met modern definitions of immersive VR. Most studies (29 of 40) targeted temporal bone surgery. Using the Kirkpatrick four-level evaluation model, all studies were limited to level-1 (learner reaction) or level-2 (knowledge or skill performance). CONCLUSIONS: Current educational applications of XR in OHNS are limited to VR, do not fully immerse participants and do not assess higher-level learning outcomes. The educational OHNS community would benefit from a shared definition for VR technology, assessment of skills transfer (level-3 and higher), and deliberate testing of AR, MR, and procedures beyond temporal bone surgery. Laryngoscope, 133:227-234, 2023.

The Student-Generated Reasoning Tool (SGRT): Linking medical knowledge and clinical reasoning in preclinical education.

INTRODUCTION: The simultaneous integration of knowledge acquisition and development of clinical reasoning in preclinical medical education remains a challenge. To help address this challenge, the authors developed and implemented the Student-Generated Reasoning Tool (SGRT)-a tool asking students to propose and justify pathophysiological hypotheses, generate findings, and critically appraise information. METHODS: In 2019, students in a first-year preclinical course (n = 171; SGRT group) were assigned to one of 20 teams. Students used the SGRT individually, then in teams, and faculty provided feedback. The control group (n = 168) consisted of students from 2018 who did not use SGRT. Outcomes included academic performance, effectiveness of collaborative environments using the SGRT, and student feedback. RESULTS: Students were five times more likely to get questions correct if they were in the SGRT group versus control group. Accuracy of pathophysiological hypotheses was significantly lower for individuals than teams. Qualitative analysis indicated students benefited from generating their own data, justifying their reasoning, and working individually as well as in teams. CONCLUSIONS: This study introduces the SGRT as a potentially engaging, case-based, and collaborative learning method that may help preclinical medical students become aware of their knowledge gaps and integrate their knowledge in basic and clinical sciences in the context of clinical reasoning.

Face-Processing Performance is an Independent Predictor of Social Affect as Measured by the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule Across Large-Scale Datasets.

Face-processing deficits, while not required for the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), have been associated with impaired social skills-a core feature of ASD; however, the strength and prevalence of this relationship remains unclear. Across 445 participants from the NIMH Data Archive, we examined the relationship between Benton Face Recognition Test (BFRT) performance and Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Social Affect (ADOS-SA) scores. Lower BFRT scores (worse face-processing performance) were associated with higher ADOS-SA scores (higher ASD severity)-a relationship that held after controlling for other factors associated with face processing, i.e., age, sex, and IQ. These findings underscore the utility of face discrimination, not just recognition of facial emotion, as a key covariate for the severity of symptoms that characterize ASD.

The Effect of Radiation and Chemoradiation Therapy on the Head and Neck Mucosal Microbiome: A Review.

Radiation (RT) and chemoradiation therapy (CRT) play an essential role in head and neck cancer treatment. However, both cause numerous side effects in the oral cavity, paranasal sinuses, and pharynx, having deleterious consequences on patients' quality of life. Concomitant with significant advances in radiation oncology, much attention has turned to understanding the role of the microbiome in the pathogenesis of treatment-induced tissue toxicity, to ultimately explore microbiome manipulation as a therapeutic intervention. This review sought to discuss current publications investigating the impact of RT and CRT-induced changes on the head and neck microbiome, using culture-independent molecular methods, and propose opportunities for future directions. Based on 13 studies derived from a MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science search on November 7, 2021, use of molecular methods has uncovered various phyla and genera in the head and neck microbiome, particularly the oral microbiome, not previously known using culture-based methods. However, limited research has investigated the impact of RT/CRT on subsites other than the oral cavity and none of the studies aimed to examine the relationship between the head and neck microbiome and treatment effectiveness. Findings from this review provide helpful insights on our current understanding of treatment-induced oral mucositis, dental plaque, and caries formation and highlight the need for future research to examine the effect of RT/CRT on the sinonasal and oropharyngeal microbiome. In addition, future research should use larger cohorts, examine the impact of the microbiome on treatment response, and study the effect of manipulating the microbiome to overcome therapy resistance.

A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Paper Versus Digital Reading on Reading Comprehension in Health Professional Education.

Objective. Despite a rise in the use of digital education in health professional education (HPE), little is known about the comparative effectiveness of paper-based reading and its digital alternative on reading comprehension. The objectives of this study were to identify, appraise, and synthesize the evidence regarding the effect of how media is read on reading comprehension in the context of HPE.Methods. Observational, quasi-experimental, and experimental studies published before April 16, 2021, were included if they compared the effectiveness of paper-based vs digital-based reading on reading comprehension among HPE students, trainees, and residents. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using standardized mean differences.Results. From a pool of 2,208 references, we identified and included 10 controlled studies that had collectively enrolled 817 participants. Meta-analyses revealed a slight but nonsignificant advantage to students reading paper-based HPE texts rather than digital text (standardized mean difference, -0.08; 95% CI -0.28 to 0.12). Subgroup analyses revealed that students reading HPE-related texts had better reading comprehension when reading text on paper rather than digitally (SMD = -0.36; 95% CI -0.69 to -0.03). Heterogeneity was low in all analyses. The quality of evidence was low because of risks of bias across studies.Summary. Current evidence suggests little to no difference in students' comprehension when reading HPE texts on paper vs digitally. However, we observed effects favoring reading paper-based texts when texts relevant to the students' professional discipline were considered. Rigorous studies are needed to confirm this finding and to evaluate new means of boosting reading comprehension among students in HPE programs.

Assessing open-book examination in medical education: The time is now.

As a result of the coronavirus pandemic, the feasibility of holding secure closed-book examinations in medical education is compromised. In this Personal View, we compare the underlying reasoning for using open-book and closed-book exams. We rethink the role of open-book assessment and offer ways in which we believe they can complement closed-book exams. We highlight the gap in research, highlight future directions, and call on medical educators to seize our current golden opportunity to explore the impact of open-book exams - on their own or combined to closed-book tests, as a blended approach - on learners, educators, and licensing bodies.

Journal Club Using Virtual Breakout Rooms: Interactive Continuing Education with No Learner Preparation During COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors rapidly transitioned an in-person, learner-led medical education journal club (MEJC) to the virtual environment. The "interactive, no-prep" approach, using breakout rooms within a videoconferencing system, required no prior learner preparation. METHODS: From March to May 2020, learners were invited to participate in a monthly 60-minute virtual MEJC. A needs assessment survey informed article selection. Facilitators developed a presentation to provide background and describe the article's research question(s). In breakout groups, learners generated study designs to answer the research question(s). After the actual study methodology and results were revealed, learners engaged in facilitated open discussion. After the session, learners completed an electronic survey to rate perceived usefulness and suggest improvement areas. RESULTS: A total of 15 learners participated; most completed the survey (13/15; 87%). The MEJC was rated as very or extremely useful. Qualitative feedback indicated that it was convenient, allowed creativity, and enabled rich discussion without prior preparation. When possible, improvement suggestions were implemented. DISCUSSION: The authors offer an evidence-based MEJC approach that is free, interactive with virtual breakout rooms and requires no prior learner preparation. Early indicators suggest that others navigating the COVID-19 crisis may want to implement this approach.

Journal Club Using Virtual Breakout Rooms: Interactive Continuing Education with No Learner Preparation During COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors rapidly transitioned an in-person, learner-led medical education journal club (MEJC) to the virtual environment. The "interactive, no-prep" approach, using breakout rooms within a videoconferencing system, required no prior learner preparation. METHODS: From March to May 2020, learners were invited to participate in a monthly 60-minute virtual MEJC. A needs assessment survey informed article selection. Facilitators developed a presentation to provide background and describe the article's research question(s). In breakout groups, learners generated study designs to answer the research question(s). After the actual study methodology and results were revealed, learners engaged in facilitated open discussion. After the session, learners completed an electronic survey to rate perceived usefulness and suggest improvement areas. RESULTS: A total of 15 learners participated; most completed the survey (13/15; 87%). The MEJC was rated as very or extremely useful. Qualitative feedback indicated that it was convenient, allowed creativity, and enabled rich discussion without prior preparation. When possible, improvement suggestions were implemented. DISCUSSION: The authors offer an evidence-based MEJC approach that is free, interactive with virtual breakout rooms and requires no prior learner preparation. Early indicators suggest that others navigating the COVID-19 crisis may want to implement this approach.

Effects of reading media on reading comprehension in health professional education: a systematic review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of digital-based reading versus paper-based reading on reading comprehension among students, trainees, and residents participating in health professional education. INTRODUCTION: Several reviews have examined the effects of reading media on reading comprehension; however, none have considered health professional education specifically. The growing use of electronic media in health professional education, as well as recent data on the consequences of digital-based reading on learning, justify the necessity to review the current literature to provide research and educational recommendations. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies conducted with health professions students, trainees, and residents individually receiving educational material written in their first language in a paper-based or a digital-based format will be considered. Studies conducted among participants with cognitive impairment or reading difficulties will be excluded. Observational, experimental and quasi-experimental studies that assess reading comprehension measured by previously validated or researcher-generated tests will be considered. METHODS: Relevant studies will be sought from CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (SCI and SSCI), without date or language restrictions. Two independent reviewers will perform title and abstract screening, full-text review, critical appraisal, and data extraction. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or with a third independent reviewer. Synthesis will occur at four levels (i.e., study, participant, intervention, and outcome levels) in a table format. Data will be synthesized descriptively and with meta-analyses if appropriate. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020154519.