## 3 Results
### Enhancing Virtual Reality Immersive Learning: Implementing Revised Bloom's Taxonomy in VR Training
Figure 6: Personnel radiation exposure during the preparation and handling of \({}^{99m}\)Tc-MDP radiopharmaceutical includes exposure measurements at various body parts, including Hp(0.07) at the right thumb,right index finger, right ring finger, right palm, left thumb, left index finger, left ring finger, and left palm; Hp(3) at the right eye lens and left eye lens; and Hp(10) for the whole body. The data are presented as the mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (\(n=3\)). Evaluation of Virtual Reality as a Technological Tool: Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Content Validation: Content Validity Index (CVI)  
The results of the technology acceptance model (Table S2) reveal that an overall I-CVI score of 0.93 is considered good, confirming that the experts believe the questions are relevant. In addition, the substantial content validity index score means that the questions are acceptable and appropriate. The CVI scale ranges from 1 to 5; the score of 4.93 is close to the maximum score and suggests that the students perceive a high value in VR training. Additionally, the TAM score of 4.90 is generally considered relatively high, indicative of solid acceptance and a positive attitude towards VR training, and highly accepted as a training aid. VR-Assisted Teaching Can Improve Students' Learning Effectiveness (Pre-Test, Same Day Post-Test, after 1 Month, and after 3 Months)  
The video training group (control group) and the VR training group were given a pre-test (PT) of 10 multiple-choice questions, each with 5 probable answers. As shown in Figure 7A, the PT's control group and VR group test results had a similar mean score of \(\sim\)34% correct answers. Immediately after the PT, both cohort groups were given lecture notes detailing the concise core knowledge of preparing and carrying out quality control of \({}^{99m}\)Tc-MDP to study for 15 min. Afterward, both groups were given the same 10 multiple-choice questions on the lecture notes. The results shown as PS in Figure 7A indicate an increased mean score of \(\sim\)65%. Then, the control group watched 3 \(\times\) 5 min training videos on the preparation and quality control of \({}^{99m}\)Tc-MDP on a computer. Similarly, the VR group undertook 3 \(\times\) 5 min training with immersive digital twin virtual reality simulation preparation and the quality control of \({}^{99m}\)Tc-MDP. On completion, both cohort groups were tested again with the same questions. The results indicate that the control group score (C-A) was \(\sim\)78%, and the VR group test score (VR-A) was \(\sim\)89%. A further test with the same 10 multiple-choice questions was conducted 1 month after the video and VR training to ascertain the knowledge retention of both groups. The control group score (C-1M) was \(\sim\)68%, a reduction of \(\sim\)13%, and the VR group score (VR-1M) of \(\sim\)88%, in comparison, was only marginally lower after 1 month. Both cohort groups carried out a further knowledge retention test with the same questions 3 months after the video and VR training. The control group score (C-3M) of \(\sim\)59% was significantly lower. Whereas the VR group score (VR-3M) of \(\sim\)90% was marginally higher than previous scores. The distribution of the correct answers to the three tests is illustrated in Figure 7, the control group's correct answers are shown in Figure 7B-D, and the VR group's correct answers are shown in Figure 7E-G. Immediately after the self-study, the test resulted in 25% of all the participant groups scoring \(>\) 80%. After the control group completed the video training, 57% scored \(>\) 80% (Figure 7B). In comparison, after completing the VR training, 87% of the VR group scored \(>\) 80%, 1.52-fold more significantly than the control group (Figure 7E). The control group knowledge retention test 1 month after the achieved 80% or above scores declined to 37%, representing a 2.16-fold decrease (Figure 7C). The VR group scored after 1 month, achieving scores of \(>\) 80% and declined to 80%, a 1.09-fold reduction (Figure 7F).