Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Child-Friendly Augmented Reality Tool for Patient-Centered Education in Radiology and Bone Reconstruction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Biomedical Visualisation

Part of the book series: Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology ((AEMB,volume 1171))

Abstract

The use of augmented reality (AR) has a rich history and is used in a number of fields. Its application in healthcare and anatomy education is developing considerable interest. However, although its popularity is on the rise, its use as an educational and practical tool has not been sufficiently evaluated, especially with children. Therefore, this study presents the design, development and evaluation of an educational tablet-based application with AR functionality for children. A distal radius fracture was chosen, as it is one of the more common fractures in the younger age group. Following a standardized software engineering methodology, we identified functional and non-functional requirements, creating a child-friendly tablet based AR application. This used industry standard software and incorporated three-dimensional models of a buckle fracture, object and image target marker recognition, interactivity and educational elements. In addition, we surveyed children at the Glasgow Science Centre on its usability, design and educational effectiveness. Seventy-one children completed a questionnaire (25 also underwent a short structured interview). Overall, the feedback was positive relating to entertainment value, graphic design, usability and educational scope of the application. Notably, it was shown to increase user understanding of radiology across all age groups following a trial of the application. This study shows the great potential of using digital technologies, and more particularly augmented information, in engaging future generations in science from a young age. Creation of educational materials using digital technologies, and evaluating its effectiveness, highlights the great scope novel technology could have in anatomical education and training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akçayır M, Akçayır G (2017) Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: a systematic review of the literature. Educ Res Rev 20:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen MH, Khalid MS, Brooks EI (2017) Considerations and methods for usability testing with children. In: Brooks A, Brooks E (eds) Interactivity, game creation, design, learning, and innovation. ArtsIT 2016, DLI 2016. Lecture notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, vol 196. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson K, Emmerton LM (2016) Contribution of mobile health applications to self-management by consumers: review of published evidence. Aust Health Rev 40:591–597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barsom EZ, Graafland M, Schijven MP (2016) Systematic review on the effectiveness of augmented reality applications in medical training. Surg Endosc 30:4174–4183

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Baus O, Bouchard S (2014) Moving from virtual reality exposure-based therapy to augmented reality exposure-based therapy: a review. Front Hum Neurosci 8:112

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bayat Games (2017) Free platform game assets. Version 1.0. GitHub, Inc., Abbasabad, Iran. 21.5 MB. https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/2d/environments/free-platform-game-assets-85838. Accessed 20 May 2019

  • Bennett S, Maton K, Kervin L (2008) The ‘digital natives’ debate: a critical review of the evidence. Br J Educ Tech 39:775–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billinghurst M, Kato H, Poupyrev I (2001) The MagicBook: a transitional AR interface. Comput Graph 25:745–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billington C (2016) How digital technology can support early language and literacy outcomes in early years settings: a review of the literature, 1st edn. National Literacy Trust, London. 17 p. https://literacytrust.org.uk/documents/194/2016_06_16_free_research_-_digital_technology_early_literacy_review_2016_oWCanmt.pdf. Accessed 20 May 2019

  • Blackler A, Popovic V, Mahar D (2003) The nature of intuitive use of products: an experimental approach. Des Stud 24:491–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooke J (1996) SUS: a ‘quick and dirty’ usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, McClelland IL (eds) Usability evaluation in industry, 1st edn. London, Taylor & Francis Ltd, pp 189–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner JS (1977) The process of education, 2nd edn. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. 128 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen CH, Lee IJ, Lin LY (2016) Augmented reality-based video-modeling storybook of nonverbal facial cues for children with autism spectrum disorder to improve their perceptions and judgments of facial expressions and emotions. Comput Hum Behav 55:477–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen P, Liu X, Cheng W, Huang R (2017) A review of using augmented reality in education from 2011 to 2016. In: Popescu E, Kinshuk KKM, Huang R, Jemni M, Chen NS, Sampson DG (eds) Innovations in smart learning, 1st edn. Springer Science+Business Media, Singapore, pp 13–18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke L (2010) Assessing concurrent think-aloud protocol as a usability test method: a technical communication approach. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 53(3):202–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doubleday EG, O’Loughlin VD, Doubleday AF (2011) The virtual anatomy laboratory: usability testing to improve an online learning resource for anatomy education. Anat Sci Educ 4:318–326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dunleavy M, Dede C (2014) Augmented reality teaching and learning. In: Spector JM, Merrill MD, Elen J, Bishop MJ (eds) The handbook of research for educational communications and technology, 4th edn. New York, Springer Science+Business Media, pp 735–745

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Falloon G (2013a) Young students using iPads: app design and content influences on their learning pathways. Comput Educ 68:505–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falloon G (2013b) Creating content: building literacy skills in year 1 students using open format apps. Comput New Zeal Schools Learn Teach Tech 25:77–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrer-Torregrosa J, Torralba J, Jimenez MA, García S, Barcia JM (2015) ARBOOK: development and assessment of a tool based on augmented reality for anatomy. J Sci Educ Tech 24:119–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraunhofer MEVIS (2018) Fraunhofer Institute for medical image computing MEVIS. Liver surgery. Bremen, Germany. https://www.mevis.fraunhofer.de/en/solutionpages/liver-surgery.html. Accessed 20 May 2019

  • Gelman DL (2014) Design for kids: digital products for playing and learning, 1st edn. Rosenfeld Media, New York. 248 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Gopalan V, Bakar JAA, Zulkifli A (2017) A brief review of augmented reality science learning. AIP Conf Proc 1891(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5005377

  • Gould DJ, Terrell MA, Fleming J (2008) A usability study of users’ perceptions toward a multimedia computer-assisted learning tool for neuroanatomy. Anat Sci Educ 1:175–183

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hornecker E, Dünser A (2009) Of pages and paddles: Children’s expectations and mistaken interactions with physical–digital tools. Interact Comput 21:95–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamphuis C, Barsom E, Schijven M, Christoph N (2014) Augmented reality in medical education? Perspect Med Educ 3:300–311

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kerawalla L, Luckin R, Seljeflot S, Woolard A (2006) “Making it real”: exploring the potential of augmented reality for teaching primary school science. Virtual Reality 10:163–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koohang A (2004) A study of users’ perceptions toward E-learning courseware usability. Int J E-Learn 3(2):10–17. Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

    Google Scholar 

  • Koohang A, Paliszkiewicz J (2014) Empirical validation of an learning courseware usability model. Issues Inf Syst 15:270–275

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreps GL, Neuhauser I (2010) New directions in health communication: opportunities and challenges. Patient Educ Couns 78:329–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Küçük S, Kapakin S, Göktaş Y (2016) Learning anatomy via mobile augmented reality: effects on achievement and cognitive load. Anat Sci Educ 9:411–421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liarokapis F, Anderson EF (2010) Using augmented reality as a medium to assist teaching in higher education. In: Kjelldahl L, Baronoski G (eds) Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the European Association for Computer Graphics (Eurographics 2010); Norrköping, Sweden: 2010 May 3–7. European Association for Computer Graphics, Geneva, pp 9–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Markopoulos P, Bekker M (2003) On the assessment of usability testing methods for children. Interact Comput 15:227–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McQueen A, Cress C, Tothy A (2012) Using a tablet computer during pediatric procedures: a case series and review of the “apps”. Pediatr Emerg Care 28:712–714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsuhashi N, Fujieda K, Tamura T, Kawamoto S, Takagi T, Okubo K (2009) BodyParts3D: 3D structure database for anatomical concepts. Nucleic Acids Res 37:D782–D785

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mott J, Bucolo S, Cuttle L, Mill J, Hilder M, Miller K, Kimble RM (2008) The efficacy of an augmented virtual reality system to alleviate pain in children undergoing burns dressing changes: a randomised controlled trial. Burns 34:803–808

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen J (2010) Children’s websites: usability issues in designing for young people. Evidence-Based User Experience Research, Training, and Consulting. Nielsen Norman Group (NN/g), Fremont, CA. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/childrens-websites-usability-issues/. Accessed 20 May 2019

  • Peddie J (2017) Augmented reality: where we will all live, 1st edn. Springer, New York. 323 p

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rohrer C (2014) When to use which user-experience research methods. Evidence-Based User Experience Research, Training, and Consulting. Nielsen Norman Group (NN/g), Fremont, CA. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/which-ux-research-methods/. Accessed 20 May 2019

  • Rosset A, Spadola L, Ratib O (2004) OsiriX: an open-source software for navigating in multidimensional DICOM images. J Digit Imaging 17:205–216

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Svensson PG (2002) eHealth applications in health care management. eHealth Int 1:5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor AM, Diggle P, Wessels Q (2018) What do the public know about anatomy? Anatomy education to the public and the implications. Anat Sci Educ 11:117–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Trundle KC (2015) The inclusion of science in early childhood classrooms. In: Trundle KC, Saçkes M (eds) Research in early childhood science education, 1st edn. Dordrecht, Springer, pp 1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Valerio G, Galle F, Mancusi C, Di Onofrio VD, Colapietro M, Guida P, Liguori G (2010) Pattern of fractures across pediatric age groups: analysis of individual and lifestyle factors. BMC Public Health 10:656

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Vines A (2012) Helping your wrist recover after a fracture: information for patients, 3rd edn. Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford. 5 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Vuforia (2017) Vuforia object scanner. Vuforia developer portal. PTC Inc., Massachusetts, USA. https://developer.vuforia.com/. Accessed 20 May 2019

  • Wan Yahaya WA, Salam SN (2008) Smiley faces: scales measurement for children assessment. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international Malaysian educational technology convention: smart education: converging technology, pedagogy and content; Kuantan, Pahang Darul Makmur, Malaysia, 2008 November 4–7. Malaysian Educational Technology Association (META), Penang, pp 1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • White B (2016) Designing for kids is not child’s play. Smashing Magazine. 20 January 2016. Smashing Media AG, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany. https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2016/01/designing-apps-for-kids-is-not-childs-play/. Accessed 20 May 2019

  • Wojciechowski R, Cellary W (2013) Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Comput Educ 68:570–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wrench J, Punyanunt-Carter N, Ward M Sr (2015) Corporate training. In: Wrench J, Punyanunt-Carter N, Ward M (eds) Sr. organizational communication: theory, research, and practice, 1st edn. FlatWorld, Boston. 528 p. https://catalog.flatworldknowledge.com/bookhub/reader/7635?e=wrenchorgcomm-27115-20150226-114842-208230. Accessed 20 May 2019

  • Yilmaz RM, Kucuk S, Goktas Y (2017) Are augmented reality picture books magic or real for preschool children aged five to six? Br J Educ Tech 48:824–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuen SC, Yaoyuneyong G, Johnson E (2011) Augmented reality: an overview and five directions for AR in education. J Educ Tech Dev Exchange 4:119–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu E, Hadadgar A, Masiello I, Zary N (2014) Augmented reality in healthcare education: an integrative review. Peer J 2:e469

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Anatomy Facility, School of Life Sciences, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Ruth Connaghan

  2. School of Simulation and Visualization, The Glasgow School of Art, Glasgow, UK

    Ruth Connaghan & Matthieu Poyade

  3. Touch Surgery, London, UK

    Ruth Connaghan

  4. Anatomy Facility, Thomson Building, School of Life Sciences, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Paul M. Rea

Authors
  1. Ruth Connaghan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthieu Poyade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul M. Rea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul M. Rea .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Anatomy Facility, Thomson Building, School of Life Sciences, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Paul M. Rea

Appendices

Appendices

9.1.1 Appendix 1

figure a

9.1.2 Appendix 2

figure b
figure c
figure d
figure e

9.1.3 Appendix 3: Evaluation Interview and Pre-test/Post-test Questions

Demographic Screener Questions

  1. 1.

    How old are you?

  2. 2.

    Do you have access to a tablet device or other mobile device technology at home?

  3. 3.

    Have you ever broken a bone before?

Pre-test/Post-test Questions

  1. 1.

    What is an x-Ray?

  2. 2.

    What is Augmented Reality?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Connaghan, R., Poyade, M., Rea, P.M. (2019). Evaluation of Child-Friendly Augmented Reality Tool for Patient-Centered Education in Radiology and Bone Reconstruction. In: Rea, P. (eds) Biomedical Visualisation. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 1171. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24281-7_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation