Abstract

The use of augmented reality (AR) technology in health education is growing rapidly due to its ability to provide interactive and immersive learning experiences. However, research that comprehensively evaluates the feasibility of AR applications on female reproductive system material is still limited. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of an augmented reality (AR)-based application as an interactive medium in learning about the female reproductive system. The evaluation was conducted on four main aspects, namely: software engineering, learning design, visual communication, and user acceptance. The research method used is a quantitative descriptive approach with data collection techniques through assessment questionnaires by experts and end users (students). The evaluation results show that the software engineering aspect obtained a feasibility score of 82% (excellent feasibility), the learning design aspect 85% (excellent feasibility), the visual communication aspect 71% (good feasibility), and the user acceptance aspect 85% (excellent feasibility). These findings indicate that the developed AR application is generally very suitable for use as a learning medium, especially in supporting the understanding of the concept of the female reproductive system interactively and contextually. However, the visual communication aspect still requires improvement to optimize the user experience. This research contributes to the development of innovative learning media in the field of health education and opens up opportunities for further research that tests the effectiveness of learning quantitatively and in the long term.

There is no Figure or data content available for this article

References

• Timotheou S, Miliou O, Dimitriadis Y, Sobrino SV, Giannoutsou N, Cachia R, et al. Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools’ digital capacity and transformation: A literature review. Educ Inf Technol. 2022 Nov 21;28(6):6695.
• Hikmawati Nurrokhmanti, Mayasari DS, Nabila N, Maulidina A, Gharini P. Augmented Reality of Heart in Teaching Gross Anatomy of the Heart: A Lesson Learned. J Pendidik Kedokt Indones Indones J Med Educ. 2022 Dec 19;11(4):419–27.
• Tang KS, Cheng DL, Mi E, Greenberg PB. Augmented reality in medical education: a systematic review. Can Med Educ J. 2020 Mar 16;11(1):e81–96.
• García-Robles P, Cortés-Pérez I, Nieto-Escámez FA, García-López H, Obrero-Gaitán E, Osuna-Pérez MC. Immersive virtual reality and augmented reality in anatomy education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Anat Sci Educ. 2024;17(3):514–28.
• Wolf J, Wolfer V, Halbe M, Maisano F, Lohmeyer Q, Meboldt M. Comparing the effectiveness of augmented reality-based and conventional instructions during single ECMO cannulation training. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2021 July;16(7):1171–80.
• Febrita RE, Ratri AA. Pengembangan Media Pembelajaran Sistem Reproduksi Berbasis Augmented Reality Bagi Anak Berkebutuhan Khusus. In ISAS Publishing; 2022. p. 224–31. (8th; vol. 8).
• Vallée A, Blacher J, Cariou A, Sorbets E. Blended Learning Compared to Traditional Learning in Medical Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Aug 10;22(8):e16504.
• Mendez-Lopez M, Juan MC, Molla R, Fidalgo C. Evaluation of an Augmented Reality Application for Learning Neuroanatomy in Psychology. Anat Sci Educ. 2022;15(3):535–51.
• Putri HM, Pertiwi KR. Augmented reality media of the human reproductive system for class XI high school students. J BIOEDUKATIKA. 2022;10(3):119–32.
• Iparraguirre-Villanueva O, Andia-Alcarraz J, Saba-Estela F, Epifanía-Huerta A. Mobile Application with Augmented Reality as a Support Tool for Learning Human Anatomy. Int J Eng Pedagogy IJEP. 2024 Jan 30;14(1):82–95.
• Baran B, Kaptanoglu S, Esen E, Siyez D. Reproductive System Augmented Reality Application for Sexual Health Classes. Int J Sex Health. 2020 Oct 6;32:1–13.
• Dhar P, Rocks T, Samarasinghe RM, Stephenson G, Smith C. Augmented reality in medical education: students’ experiences and learning outcomes. Med Educ Online. 26(1):1953953.
• Chang HY, Binali T, Liang JC, Chiou GL, Cheng KH, Lee SWY, et al. Ten years of augmented reality in education: A meta-analysis of (quasi-) experimental studies to investigate the impact. Comput Educ. 2022 Dec 1;191:104641.
• Albishri B, Blackmore KL. Duality in barriers and enablers of augmented reality adoption in education: a systematic review of reviews. Interact Technol Smart Educ. 2024 Apr 8;22(2):167–91.
• Salimi S, Asgari Z, Mohammadnejad A, Teimazi A, Bakhtiari M. Efficacy of virtual reality and augmented reality in anatomy education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Anat Sci Educ. 2024;17(9):1668–85.
• Bogomolova K, van der Ham IJM, Dankbaar MEW, van den Broek WW, Hovius SER, van der Hage JA, et al. The Effect of Stereoscopic Augmented Reality Visualization on Learning Anatomy and the Modifying Effect of Visual-Spatial Abilities: A Double-Center Randomized Controlled Trial. Anat Sci Educ. 2020;13(5):558–67.
• Bölek KA, De Jong G, Henssen D. The effectiveness of the use of augmented reality in anatomy education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2021 July 27;11(1):15292.
• Rao X, Wu QQ, Yang J, Li X. Application of augmented reality technology for obstetrics and gynecology teaching among undergraduates. BMC Med Educ. 2025 Aug 8;25(1):1151.
• Uymaz P, Uymaz AO. Assessing acceptance of augmented reality in nursing education. PloS One. 2022;17(2):e0263937.
• Graser S, Böhm S. A Systematic Literature Review on Technology Acceptance Research on Augmented Reality in the Field of Training and Education [Internet]. arXiv; 2024 [cited 2025 Sept 22]. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.13946

How to Cite This

Article Metrics

Download Statistics

Other Statistics

Copyright and Permissions

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Data Availability