ArticleBMC medical education2024
Haptic experience to significantly motivate anatomy learning in medical students.
Article 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 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effectiveness of immersive virtual reality as a student-centered tool for learning neuroanatomy: A single-blind randomized controlled trial with physiotherapy students.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Trial
- From Images to Specimens: The Impact of Tactile, Three-Dimensional Learning in Dental Anatomy.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Feel it to learn it!-Cognitive and motivational effects of haptic learning materials.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, multiple tools exist to teach and learn anatomy, but finding an adequate activity is challenging. However, it can be achieved through haptic experiences, where motivation is the means of a significant learning process. This study aimed to evaluate a haptic experience to determine if a tactile and painting with color marker interactive experience, established a better learning process in comparison to the traditional 2D workshop on printed paper with photographs.
methodsPlaster bone models of the scapulae, humerus and clavicle were elaborated from a computerized scan tomography. Second year undergraduate medical students were invited to participate, where subjects were randomly assigned to the traditional 2D method or the 3D plaster bone model. A third group decided not to join any workshop. Following, all three groups were evaluated on bone landmarks and view, laterality, muscle insertions and functions. 2D and 3D workshop students were asked their opinion in a focus group and answered a survey regarding the overall perception and learning experience. Evaluation grades are presented as mean ± standard deviation, and answers from the survey are presented as percentages.
resultsThe survey demonstrated the students in the 3D model graded the experience as outstanding, and in five out of the six questions, answers were very good or excellent. In contrast, for students participating in the 2D workshop the most common answers were fair or good. The exception was the answer regarding the quiz, where both groups considered it good, despite the average among all groups not being a passing grade.
conclusionsTo learn the anatomy of the shoulder, the conventional methodology was compared with a haptic experience, where plaster bone models were used, enabling students to touch and paint on them. Based on the focus group and survey this study revealed the 3D workshop was an interactive experience where, the sense of touch and painting greatly contributed to their learning process. Even though this activity was useful in terms of learning bone landmarks, view muscle insertions, and establish relations, further activities must be developed to increase their understanding regarding their function, and its relevance in a clinical setting.
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.