ArticleScientific reports2026
3D imaging contribution in pediatric surgical oncology: a multi-stakeholder assessment study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical imaging is crucial for surgical planning, yet surgeons struggle with mental transformation of 2D images into 3D representations, particularly in complex pediatric pelvic anatomy. This study evaluated perceived benefits of 3D imaging with tractography compared to conventional 2D MRI in pediatric pelvic tumor surgery. A nationwide study assessed three groups: non-medical personnel (n = 30), medical trainees (residents and fellows; primary analysis n = 61, excluding 3 medical students), and senior pediatric surgeons (n = 12). Using 3-Tesla MRI with specialized protocols including high-resolution CoroT2cube and diffusion tensor imaging, participants evaluated five clinical cases in both 2D and 3D formats using 7-point Likert scales. Statistical analysis employed Wilcoxon paired tests with Bonferroni correction. All groups showed significant improvements in perceived understanding with 3D imaging. Non-medical personnel scores increased from 4.24 (± 0.69) to 6.27 (± 0.28) (p < 0.001), particularly in understanding disease and surgical objectives. Medical trainees improved from 5.08 (± 0.61) to 6.42 (± 0.49) (p < 0.001), with enhanced understanding of surgical objectives and anatomical relationships. Senior surgeons’ scores increased from 5.02 (± 0.69) to 6.33 (± 0.52) (p < 0.001), showing significant improvements in preoperative planning and family communication. Effect sizes were substantial across groups (Cohen’s d: 2.80, 1.90, and 1.52 respectively), though the within-subject design likely contributes to effect size inflation. This study provides preliminary evidence for perceived 3D imaging value in pediatric pelvic tumor surgery. Improved anatomical comprehension among non-medical personnel may benefit informed consent, while enhanced visualization aids surgical education and planning. High surgeon acceptance (92%) suggests strong acceptability, though these exploratory findings require validation before implementation recommendations can be made. Prospective studies evaluating objective clinical outcomes, workflow integration and cost-effectiveness require further study.
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.