Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38231228›Full record

ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2024

Are 3D-printed anatomical models of the ear effective for teaching anatomy? A comparative pilot study versus cadaveric models.

Eléonore Brumpt, Eugénie Bertin, Xavier Gabrion, Camille Coussens, Laurent Tatu, Aurélien Louvrier

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2024. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

6 authors.

Eléonore BrumptDépartement d'Anatomie, University Franche-Comté, UFRSanté, 19 Rue Ambroise-Paré CS 71806, 25000, Besançon, France. ebrumpt@chu-besancon.fr.
Eugénie BertinDépartement d'Anatomie, University Franche-Comté, UFRSanté, 19 Rue Ambroise-Paré CS 71806, 25000, Besançon, France.
Xavier GabrionDépartement de Mécanique Appliquée, University Franche-Comté, FEMTO-ST, CNRS/UFC/ENSMM/UTBM, 25000, Besançon, France.
Camille CoussensPlateforme I3DM (Impression 3D Médicale), CHU Besançon, 25000, Besançon, France.
Laurent TatuDépartement d'Anatomie, University Franche-Comté, UFRSanté, 19 Rue Ambroise-Paré CS 71806, 25000, Besançon, France.
Aurélien LouvrierLaboratoire Nano MédecineImagerieThérapeutique, University Franche-Comté, EA 4662, 25000, Besançon, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDespite the combination of chalkboard lectures and cadaveric models, the ear remains a complex anatomical structure that is difficult for medical students to grasp. The aim of this study was to evaluate the contribution of a 3D-printed ear model for educating undergraduate medical students by comparing it with a conventional cadaveric model.

methodsModels of the ear comprising the outer ear, tympanic membrane, ossicles and inner ear were modeled and then 3D-printed at 6:1 and 10:1 scales based on cadaveric dissection and CT, cone-beam CT and micro/nano CT scans. Cadaveric models included two partially dissected dry temporal bones and ossicles. Twenty-four 3rd year medical students were given separate access to cadaveric models (n = 12) or 3D-printed models (n = 12). A pre-test and two post-tests were carried out to assess knowledge (n = 24). A satisfaction questionnaire focusing solely on the 3D-printed model, comprising 17 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale, was completed by all study participants. A 5-point Likert scale questionnaire comprising four items (realism, color, quality and satisfaction with the 3D-printed ear model) was given to three expert anatomy Professors.

resultsThe test scores on the first post-test were higher for the students who had used the 3D-printed models (p < 0.05). Overall satisfaction among the students and the experts was very high, averaging 4.7 on a 5-point Likert-type satisfaction scale.

conclusionThis study highlights the overall pedagogical value of a 3D-printed model for learning ear anatomy.

Indexed as

AnatomyStudents, MedicalCadaverHumansModels, AnatomicPilot ProjectsPrinting, Three-DimensionalTeachingX-Ray Microtomography3D printingAnatomyEarLearningTeaching

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.