3. Harden RM. Ten key features of the future medical school-not an impossible dream. Med Teach 2018;40(10):1010-5.
4. Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, et al. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an inter-dependent world. Lancet 2010;376(9756):1923-58.
5. Grainger R, Liu Q, Geertshuis S. Learning technologies: a medium for the transformation of medical education? Med Educ 2021;55(1):23-9.
6. Dahle LO, Brynhildsen J, Behrbohm Fallsberg M, Rundquist I, Hammar M. Pros and cons of vertical integration between clinical medicine and basic science within a problem-based undergraduate medical curriculum: examples and experiences from Linköping, Sweden. Med Teach 2002;24(3):280-5.
7. Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 96. Med Teach 2015;37(4):312-22.
10. Blender: a 3D modelling and rendering package [Internet]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Stichting Blender Foundation; 2018 [cited at 2021 Sep 30]. Available from:
http://www.blender.org
11. Unity: using the UI tools [Internet]. San Francisco (CA): Unity Technologies; c2021 [cited at 2021 Sep 30]. Available from:
https://unity.com/
12. Khalil MK, Paas F, Johnson TE, Payer AF. Design of interactive and dynamic anatomical visualizations: the implication of cognitive load theory. Anat Rec B New Anat 2005;286(1):15-20.
13. Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educ Technol Res Dev 2020;68(1):1-16.
14. Martens R, Gulikers J, Bastiaens T. The impact of in trinsic motivation on e-learning in authentic computer tasks. J Comput Assist Learn 2004;20(5):368-76.
15. Keller JM. Motivational design for learning and performance: the ARCS model approach. New York (NY): Springer; 2010.
16. Li K, Keller JM. Use of the ARCS model in education: a literature review. Computers & Education 2018;122:54-62.
17. Milman NB, Wessmiller J. Motivating the online learner using Keller’s ARCS model. Distance Learn 2016;13(2):67-71.
18. Bandura A. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice-Hall; 1977.
19. Knowles MS. Self-directed learning: a guide for learners and teachers. New York (NY): Association Press; 1975.
20. Azer SA. A multimedia CD-ROM tool to improve student understanding of bile salts and bilirubin metabolism: evaluation of its use in a medical hybrid PBL course. Adv Physiol Educ 2005;29(1):40-50.
21. Rosenberg H, Grad HA, Matear DW. The effectiveness of computer-aided, self-instructional programs in dental education: a systematic review of the literature. J Dent Educ 2003;67(5):524-32.
22. Revell SM, McCurry MK. Engaging millennial learners: effectiveness of personal response system technology with nursing students in small and large classrooms. J Nurs Educ 2010;49(5):272-5.
24. Thompson ME, Ford R, Webster A. Effectiveness of interactive, online games in learning neuroscience and students’ perception of the games as learning tools: a pre-experimental study. J Allied Health 2011;40(3):150-5.