ReviewAnatomical sciences education2026
Next generation open access visualization of neuroanatomy through 3D modeling and 3D printing.
Review in Anatomical sciences education, 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.
- Next generation open access visualization of neuroanatomy through 3D modeling and 3D printing.Anatomical sciences education · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has transformed anatomy education by enabling students to visualize complex spatial relationships through interactive tactile learning. This technology is particularly valuable for neuroanatomy education, widely regarded as one of the most spatially challenging subjects in health professions curricula where form-function relationships are far less intuitive than other systems. Traditionally, neuroanatomy education has relied on intact donor brains for dissection and commercial neuroanatomical models. However, many institutions lack access to body donor programs that provide whole human brains, and vendor-supplied plastic models can be prohibitively expensive for some institutions. 3D printing addresses both challenges by enabling educators to create accurate, customized neuroanatomical models at a fraction of commercial costs. Despite this significant potential, implementation of 3D-printed models in neuroanatomy curricula remains limited. Anatomy educators face substantial barriers when adopting 3D printing technologies, including sourcing ethically appropriate digital data, selecting suitable printing equipment, choosing the best printing medium (e.g., plastic vs. resin), and effectively integrating these learning aids into existing curricula. To address these challenges, this discursive article provides comprehensive guidance on 3D printing for neuroanatomy education. We examine the pedagogical motivations and methodologies for creating 3D-printed brain models, and we evaluate 3D printing options across multiple domains: cost-effectiveness, required technical expertise, material properties, software accessibility, and model complexity. Through this analysis, we aim to enhance accessibility and knowledge of 3D printing technologies, ultimately supporting broader adoption of this powerful educational tool among anatomy educators.
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.