JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Virtual reality (VR) is a promising digital health intervention and has been effective in reducing children’s pain and anxiety when used for distraction during medical procedures. Virtual reality’s immersive, ludic potential has also led to its adaptation as a pediatric patient education tool in settings such as surgery, medical imaging, and community health. However, few researchers have mapped existing and emerging VR-based educational health interventions for children, nor examined their pedagogical content, and evaluations.

Objective:

The aim of this scoping review was to provide a comprehensive overview of current and emerging VR interventions for children’s health education by mapping their characteristics, pedagogical approaches, and reported outcomes

Methods:

Eight academic databases from medicine, engineering, psychology, and education were searched. Eligible publications included protocols, experimental studies, qualitative research, conference proceedings, and descriptive papers published between January 1, 2000 to May 31, 2026 describing immersive VR interventions to educate children (≤18 years) about their health or healthcare experiences. Up to three reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. Findings were synthesized descriptively using quantitative summaries and qualitative content analysis. The pedagogical objectives and contents of each intervention were characterized using Bloom’s taxonomy.

Results:

Eight-two publications met the inclusion criteria, describing 72 different immersive VR interventions. Interventions targeted children undergoing medical procedures (e.g., needle pokes, medical imaging, surgery; n=30); chronically ill or hospitalized, in-patient children (n=19); and children from community settings (n=23). All interventions targeted children’s health knowledge, understanding, and information retention, while 42 also addressed attitudes, emotions, or values and/or the development of physical, movement-based skills. Procedural preparation interventions tended to rely on passive VR videos, simple interactive elements, and basic learning mechanics (e.g., watch-and-learn, skill rehearsal), whereas interventions for chronically ill, hospitalized, and community-based children incorporated more diverse and complex learning and game mechanics. Most studies reported improvements in clinical, behavioural, learning, and attitudinal outcomes. However, researchers relied primarily on quantitative evaluation methods, inconsistently reported adverse effects, and assessed learning outcomes in only about one-quarter of studies.

Conclusions:

While VR is a promising child health education tool, the ways in which interventions are developed and evaluated may limit our understanding of how VR can be designed, adapted and improved for pedagogical transformation in children’s healthcare. Future researchers should address the affective and/or psychomotor components of health, in addition to cognitive information needs, and assess changes in learning, attitudes, and behaviours as key outcomes when evaluating educational VR interventions.