ArticleScientific reports2025
Educational benefits of laser scanning and 3D printing for studying and preserving Southeast Asian ceramic artifacts.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of 3D technologies into education opens up new opportunities for the study and preservation of cultural artifacts, particularly in the context of studying ceramics. This study aims to assess the impact of using laser scanning and 3D printing technologies on student satisfaction with the educational process. The study had a quasi-experimental design with two groups. The theoretical part of the taught course "Ceramics of China and Southeast Asia" was the same for both groups. The Intervention group (n = 114) used 3D scanning and printing in practical classes, while the Control group (n = 114) studied using traditional methods. The course lasted 15 weeks. At the end of the course, students in both groups completed a questionnaire on the scales Tutor Guidance & Support, Satisfaction, Content & Experience, Collaboration & Activities. The results of the questionnaire of students in both groups were compared using an independent t-test. The influence of individual student characteristics (gender, age, previous experience) was determined using one-way ANOVA. The Intervention group showed significantly higher scores on Satisfaction, Content & Experience, and Collaboration & Activities than the Control group. Gender and previous experience influenced the course's perception, while the students' age was not a significant factor. The obtained results are important for the development of 3D approaches to learning in the field of cultural heritage and archaeology, as well as for the creation of more interactive and effective educational programs that use modern technologies for the preservation and study of cultural artifacts.
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.