Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38671399›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical education2024

3D visualization technology for Learning human anatomy among medical students and residents: a meta- and regression analysis.

Junming Wang, Wenjun Li, Aishe Dun, Ning Zhong, Zhen Ye

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Benefit of virtual reality during visceral artery aneurysms open and endovascular surgery planning.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
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.

Junming WangDepartment of Health Management, The First Affiliated Hospital, Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong First Medical University, 250013, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Wenjun LiDepartment of Health Management, The First Affiliated Hospital, Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong First Medical University, 250013, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Aishe DunSchool of Stomatology, Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Ning ZhongDepartment of Health Management, The First Affiliated Hospital, Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong First Medical University, 250013, Jinan, Shandong, China. zhongning@sdfmu.edu.cn.
Zhen YeDepartment of Health Management, The First Affiliated Hospital, Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong First Medical University, 250013, Jinan, Shandong, China. yezichess@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background3D visualization technology applies computers and other devices to create a realistic virtual world for individuals with various sensory experiences such as 3D vision, touch, and smell to gain a more effective understanding of the relationships between real spatial structures and organizations. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of 3D visualization technology in human anatomy teaching/training and explore the potential factors that affect the training effects to better guide the teaching of classroom/laboratory anatomy.

methodsWe conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies on teaching human anatomy using 3D visualization technology. We extensively searched three authoritative databases, PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase; the main outcomes were the participants' test scores and satisfaction, while the secondary outcomes were time consumption and enjoyment. Heterogeneity by I² was statistically determined because I²> 50%; therefore, a random-effects model was employed, using data processing software such as RevMan, Stata, and VOSviewer to process data, apply standardized mean difference and 95% confidence interval, and subgroup analysis to evaluate test results, and then conduct research through sensitivity analysis and meta-regression analysis.

resultsThirty-nine randomized controlled trials (2,959 participants) were screened and included in this study. The system analysis of the main results showed that compared with other methods, including data from all regions 3D visualization technology moderately improved test scores as well as satisfaction and enjoyment; however, the time that students took to complete the test was not significantly reduced. Meta-regression analysis also showed that regional factorsaffected test scores, whereas other factors had no significant impact. When the literature from China was excluded, the satisfaction and happiness of the 3D virtual-reality group were statistically significant compared to those of the traditional group; however, the test results and time consumption were not statistically significant.

conclusion3D visualization technology is an effective way to improve learners' satisfaction with and enjoyment of human anatomical learning, but it cannot reduce the time required for testers to complete the test. 3D visualization technology may struggle to improve the testers' scores. The literature test results from China are more prone to positive results and affected by regional bias.

Indexed as

AnatomyImaging, Three-DimensionalStudents, MedicalComputer-Assisted InstructionHumansInternship and ResidencyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRegression AnalysisVirtual Reality3D visualization technologyHuman anatomyMedical educationMeta-analysisRegression analysis

Identifiers

PMID38671399
PMCPMC11055294

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.