Article3D printing in medicine2023
Comparative effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) vs 3D printed models of congenital heart disease in resident and nurse practitioner educational experience.
Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- How virtual reality is being adopted in anatomy education in health sciences and allied health: A systematic review.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Pooled it
- Computer-Based Simulation Technologies in Pediatric Cardiovascular Diseases: A Systematic Review of Applications and Outcomes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Pediatric Cross-Sectional Cardiac Imaging in Europe: Current Status, Disparities, and Potential Solutions: A Survey from the Association for European Pediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC) Imaging Working Group.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Mixed Reality as a Tool for Congenital Heart Disease Case Management Discussions.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Immersive Three-Dimensional Visualization as a Routine Tool for Complex Congenital Cardiac Surgical Planning: A Perspective.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Review
- Virtual Reality Curriculum Increases Pediatric Clerkship Students' Knowledge of Congenital Heart Disease.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Virtual Reality to Enhance Understanding of Congenital Heart Disease.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Transforming Care in Congenital Heart Disease: The Role of Extended Reality in Family and Trainee Education and Procedural Planning.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Review
- Extended reality in cardiovascular care: a systematic review.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Review
- The effectiveness of VR-based human anatomy simulation training for undergraduate medical students.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Surgeon's perceptions on 3D visualization methods in parotid gland tumor surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Comparing assisting technologies for proficiency in cardiac morphology: 3D printing and mixed reality versus CT slice images for morphological understanding of congenital heart defects by medical students.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
- Investigation of the Clinical Value of Four Visualization Modalities for Congenital Heart Disease.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
- Immersive 3-Dimensional Visualization Aids Transcatheter Management of a Patient With Multiple Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformations.JACC. Case reports · 2024Article
- Three-dimensional printed models as an effective tool for the management of complex congenital heart disease.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical trainees frequently note that cardiac anatomy is difficult to conceive within a two dimensional framework. The specific anatomic defects and the subsequent pathophysiology in flow dynamics may become more apparent when framed in three dimensional models. Given the evidence of improved comprehension using such modeling, this study aimed to contribute further to that understanding by comparing Virtual Reality (VR) and 3D printed models (3DP) in medical education.
objectivesWe sought to systematically compare the perceived subjective effectiveness of Virtual Reality (VR) and 3D printed models (3DP) in the educational experience of residents and nurse practitioners.
methodsTrainees and practitioners underwent individual 15-minute teaching sessions in which features of a developmentally typical heart as well as a congenitally diseased heart were demonstrated using both Virtual Reality (VR) and 3D printed models (3DP). Participants then briefly explored each modality before filling out a short survey in which they identified which model (3DP or VR) they felt was more effective in enhancing their understanding of cardiac anatomy and associated pathophysiology. The survey included a binary summative assessment and a series of Likert scale questions addressing usefulness of each model type and degree of comfort with each modality.
resultsTwenty-seven pediatric residents and 3 nurse practitioners explored models of a developmentally typical heart and tetralogy of Fallot pathology. Most participants had minimal prior exposure to VR (1.1 ± 0.4) or 3D printed models (2.1 ± 1.5). Participants endorsed a greater degree of understanding with VR models (8.5 ± 1) compared with 3D Printed models (6.3 ± 1.8) or traditional models of instruction (5.5 ± 1.5) p < 0.001. Most participants felt comfortable with modern technology (7.6 ± 2.1). 87% of participants preferred VR over 3DP.
conclusionsOur study shows that, overall, VR was preferred over 3DP models by pediatric residents and nurse practitioners for understanding cardiac anatomy and pathophysiology.
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.