3D printing in urology: Is it really promising?

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Case report: Magnetic resonance imaging-based three-dimensional printing for reconstruction of complex cloacal malformations.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023
   Article
2. Anatomical Engineering and 3D Printing for Surgery and Medical Devices: International Review and Future Exponential Innovations.BioMed research international · 2022
   Review
3. The Role of 3D-Printed Phantoms and Devices for Organ-specified Appliances in Urology.International journal of bioprinting · 2021
   Review
4. Review of the effect of 3D medical printing and virtual reality on urology training with ‘MedTRain3DModsim’ Erasmus + European Union ProjectTurkish journal of medical sciences · 2019
   Review
5. Emerging Technology and Applications of 3D Printing in the Medical Field.Missouri medicine
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as