ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Teaching Application of 3D-printed Models for Nasal Analysis.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of three-dimensional knowledge target teaching combined with immersive clinical experience in otology teaching practice.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Rhinoplasty Education During Residency: Discussion of Current Barriers, Challenges, and Opportunities for Improvement.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Review
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
Abstract
Background: A major challenge in learning rhinoplasty is correlating patients' external and internal nasal structures. We aim to explore the application of three dimensional (3D)-printed models of nasal bony-cartilaginous structures in identifying accurate nasal anatomy. Methods: Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery and plastic and reconstructive surgery residents matched patient photograph models, described relative nasal bony-cartilaginous anatomy, completed pre- and postactivity self-evaluations (based on otolaryngology "nasal deformity" milestones including "anatomy," "function," "aesthetic," and "etiology"), and rated the 3D-printed models' usefulness. Descriptive statistics were measured. Results: Thirty-seven residents correctly matched four of six model-photograph pairs and correctly described 15 of 30 anatomic relationships, on average. There was a moderate, statistically significant correlation between postgraduate year and number of correctly matched model-photograph pairs (Spearman rho = 0.58, 95% CI 0.24-0.79) and total items correct (Spearman rho = 0.61, 95% CI 0.28-0.81). Self-ratings on milestones decreased postexercise in all subcategories except "function." From 0 (low) to 100 (high), learners found the exercise useful (median 85 of 100) with a high recommendation for future use (median 87 of 100). Conclusions: Three-dimensional printed models are a valuable tool for understanding nasal anatomy. Continued standardization of designs and assessments of their educational utility will enhance their broader dissemination and implementation.
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.