Trial reportBMC medical education2022
Students' learning experiences of three-dimensional printed models and plastinated specimens: a qualitative analysis.
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 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The role of three-dimensional printing models in medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Effective approaches towards teaching human anatomy among MBBS students in India.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Comparison of cooperative learning through use of an immersive virtual reality anatomy model and a 3D plastic anatomical model.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- The Impact of Low-Fidelity Three-Dimensional-Printed Models of the Equine Distal Limb and the Canine Forelimb in Teaching Veterinary Anatomy in Practical Classes.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- A Validity Analysis of Text-to-Image Generative Artificial Intelligence Models for Craniofacial Anatomy Illustration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review of Worldwide Patent Applications in Anatomical Education (2018-2022).Acta medica Philippina · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditional cadaveric dissection is declining whilst plastinated and three-dimensional printed (3DP) models are increasingly popular as substitutes to the conventional anatomy teaching and learning methods. It is unclear about the pros and cons of these new tools and how they impact students' learning experiences of anatomy including humanistic values such as respect, care and empathy.
methodsNinety-six students' views were sought immediately after a randomized cross-over study. Pragmatic design was used to investigate the learning experiences of using plastinated and 3DP models of cardiac (in Phase 1, n = 63) and neck (in Phase 2, n = 33) anatomy. Inductive thematic analysis was conducted based on 278 free text comments (related to strengths, weaknesses, things to improve), and focus group (n = 8) transcriptions in full verbatim about learning anatomy with these tools.
resultsFour themes were found: perceived authenticity, basic understanding versus complexity, attitudes towards respect and care, and multimodality and guidance.
conclusionsOverall, students perceived plastinated specimens as more real and authentic, thus perceived more respect and care than 3DP models; whereas 3DP models were easy to use and prefered for learning basic anatomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.