Trial reportAnatomical sciences education2025
Evaluation of glasses-free 3D anatomy learning materials through a randomized control study with a puzzle-like method.
Trial report in Anatomical sciences education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of glasses-free 3D anatomy learning materials through a randomized control study with a puzzle-like method.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
3D visualization tools have been developed to assist in the anatomical learning of medical students, but the evidence on the effectiveness of these tools is inconsistent. Conventional 3D materials are often displayed on 2D screens, which can limit their educational impact. This study evaluates the effectiveness of the presentation of 3D learning materials using 3D displays compared to 2D displays in a randomized controlled trial. We developed glasses-free 3D learning materials for the anatomy of abdominal organs and blood vessels, which are compatible with the 3D spatial reality tabletop display EFL-SR1 developed by Sony. We assessed the effectiveness of these materials in a randomized controlled trial. Fifty-six medical students were randomly divided into two groups to learn using either 2D or 3D displays. The improvement in understanding of the spatial arrangement of anatomical structures was measured before and after the learning sessions using a novel 3D puzzle-like method. Both groups demonstrated improvements in understanding of the spatial arrangement of anatomical structures; there were no significant differences in overall performance between the 2D and 3D display groups. The 3D display group exhibited less variability in improvement indices, suggesting more consistent learning outcomes. The study indicates that glasses-free 3D displays can minimize learning disparities among medical students and provide a more universally effective learning environment for all students. The 3D learning materials compatible with glasses-free 3D displays and the innovative 3D puzzle-like method used in this study offer a novel approach to teaching and evaluating anatomy education.
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.