Virtual Microscopy Versus Optical Microscopy

NCT07302633 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: DR-SADAF-QAMC
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 350
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

The literature reveals ongoing debate regarding the relative effectiveness of Virtual Microscopy (VM) versus Optical Microscopy (OM) in achieving specific learning outcomes (SLOs). There remains a paucity of comprehensive, comparative research evaluating these methodologies against standardized learning outcomes in the medical undergraduate population. This instigated a comparison of VM and OM as teaching methodologies for pathology in medical education, specifically focusing on their effectiveness in achieving predetermined learning outcomes.

Conditions

Learning Problem

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Perceptions and satisfaction

  A five-point Likert scale assessed perceptions and satisfaction with the respective teaching methodology. The likert scale responses were graded as 1 for strongly disagree, 2 for disagree, 3 as neutral, 4 agree, and 5 strongly agree.

  3 hours

Study Arms (2)

Group I

EXPERIMENTAL

Students were exposed to optical microscopy (OM); OM is the conventional method of using physical microscopes to examine microscope slides.

Other: Optical Microscopy

Group II

EXPERIMENTAL

Students were exposed to virtual microscopy (VM); VM is a digital technology that allows students to view and analyze microscope slides through digital platforms.

Other: Virtual Microscopy

Interventions

Optical Microscopy OTHER

Students were exposed to optical microscopy (OM); OM is the conventional method of using physical microscopes to examine microscope slides.

Group I

Virtual Microscopy OTHER

Students were exposed to virtual microscopy (VM); VM is a digital technology that allows students to view and analyze microscope slides through digital platforms.

Group II

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 20 Years - 24 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64)

You may qualify if:

• Students of either gender
• Aged 20-24 years
• Studying in fourth-year MBBS
• Willing to participate

You may not qualify if:

• Students, absent during the interventions or assessments
• Declined or withdrew consent at any stage

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Muhammad Aamir Latif: lead

Study Sites (1)

Quaid-E-Azam Medical College

Bahawalpur, Punjab Province, 63100, Pakistan

Location

MeSH Terms

Interventions

Microscopy

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Diagnostic Imaging; Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures; Diagnosis; Investigative Techniques

Study Officials

• Sadaf Shafique, FCPS

  Quaid-E-Azam Medical College, Bahawalpur, Pakistan

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Research Consultant

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: December 11, 2025
• First Posted: December 24, 2025
• Study Start: August 1, 2024
• Primary Completion: October 30, 2024
• Study Completion: October 30, 2024
• Last Updated: December 24, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-12

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

PA (1)