ArticleBMC medical education2026
Integrating 3D skin lesion models with traditional 2D imagery in dermatology education: student perceptions within a VARK learning framework.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDermatology education relies heavily on visual learning, yet students exhibit diverse learning preferences categorized by the VARK model: Visual (V), Auditory (A), Reading/Writing (R), and Kinesthetic (K). Traditional teaching utilizing two-dimensional (2D) images primarily benefits visual learners whilst lacking tactile engagement. Three-dimensional (3D) skin lesion models address this limitation by incorporating kinesthetic learning, thereby enhancing students' comprehension of lesion morphology and texture.
objectivesTo evaluate student perceptions and preferences regarding the integration of 3D skin lesion models with 2D images in a station-based dermatology learning approach.
resultsMost students (90.2%) preferred the combined approach utilizing both modalities. 2D images received marginally higher ratings than 3D models for diagnostic skill development (7.3 ± 3.0 vs. 6.8 ± 3.0) and clinical application (7.2 ± 3.0 vs. 6.7 ± 3.1). The primary advantages of 3D models were hands-on practice (74.5%), enhanced palpation skills (57.8%), and interactive learning opportunities.
conclusionsThe integration of 3D models with 2D images was well accepted by students and supports a multimodal learning approach aligned with VARK learning preferences. These findings suggest that 3D models may serve as a useful complementary tool in dermatology education. Further studies are needed to evaluate their impact on objective learning outcomes and clinical performance in diverse educational settings.
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.