Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35918716›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2022

Utility of 3D printed models as adjunct in acetabular fracture teaching for Orthopaedic trainees.

S Goyal, Cxk Chua, Y S Chen, D Murphy, G K O 'Neill

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Three-Dimensional Printing in Pediatric Orthopaedics: Cost Analysis and Emerging Applications.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026
    Review
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

S GoyalDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Orthopaedics and Hand & Reconstructive Microsurgery Centre, National University Health System, Level 11, Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore. saumitragoyal@gmail.com.
Cxk ChuaDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Orthopaedics and Hand & Reconstructive Microsurgery Centre, National University Health System, Level 11, Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
Y S ChenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, 1 Jurong East Street 21, Singapore, 609606, Singapore.
D MurphyDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Orthopaedics and Hand & Reconstructive Microsurgery Centre, National University Health System, Level 11, Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
G K O 'NeillDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Orthopaedics and Hand & Reconstructive Microsurgery Centre, National University Health System, Level 11, Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the use of 3-D printed models as compared to didactic lectures in the teaching of acetabular fractures for Orthopaedic trainees.

methodsThis was a randomised prospective study conducted in a tertiary hospital setting which consisted of 16 Orthopaedic residents. Ten different cases of acetabular fracture patterns were identified and printed as 3-D models. The baseline knowledge of orthopaedic residents regarding acetabular fracture classification and surgical approach was determined by an x-ray based pre-test. Trainees were then randomly assigned into two groups. Group I received only lectures. Group II were additionally provided with 3-D printed models during the lecture. Participants were then assessed for comprehension and retention of teaching.

resultsSixteen trainees participated in the trial. Both Group 1 and 2 improved post teaching with a mean score of 2.5 and 1.9 to 4.4 and 6 out of 10 respectively. The post test score for fracture classification and surgical approach were significantly higher for 3-D model group (p < 0.05). Trainees felt that the physical characteristics of the 3-D models were a good representation of acetabular fracture configuration, and should be used routinely for teaching and surgical planning.

conclusion3-D printed model of real clinical cases have significant educational impact compared to lecture-based learning towards improving young trainees' understanding of complex acetabular fractures.

Indexed as

Fractures, BoneOrthopedicsAcetabulumHumansPrinting, Three-DimensionalProspective Studies3D printed modelAcetabular fractureOrthopaedic traineesTeaching and assessment tool

Identifiers

PMID35918716
PMCPMC9344721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.