ArticleBMC medical education2026
The use of 3-dimensional (3D) printing in teaching musculoskeletal oncology for medical undergraduates.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe approach to integrating relevant anatomy in the medical curriculum has been debated for many years. Current literature has explored the broad impact of 3D printing in medical education. However, there is little evidence on 3D printing for the teaching of musculoskeletal oncology (MSO). This is a self-controlled case series (SCCS) study that aims to analyse the effectiveness of 3D printed models in MSO in enhancing the learning experience, engagement and understanding of clinical and surgical anatomy for medical students.
methodA cross-sectional cohort study involving 75 clinical year medical students across 3 years from 2 medical schools that rotated through a single teaching hospital's orthopaedic department. Participants first viewed a set of computed-tomography (CT) images of a large pelvic osteosarcoma from a free open-source database, the Cancer Genome Atlas Sarcoma Collection (TCGA-SARC). A standardised 10-minute pre-intervention questionnaire which comprised 15 questions categorised by: 4 questions in 'anatomical knowledge', 7 questions in 'spatial awareness', 4 questions in 'surgical planning and complications', was administered to assess the baseline knowledge in their interpretation of the pathology via CT images only. Next, a 3D-printed model of the pelvic osteosarcoma, which included colour-coded adjacent structures, was provided as an adjunct to answer the same questionnaire. This concluded with a 5-point Likert scale feedback survey to gauge their perspectives and experience.
resultsThe mean scores comparing their pre- and post-intervention assessment questionnaire increased by +1.34 from 8.15 (SD = 1.85) to 9.49 (SD = 1.7) (p < 0.001). The final year students had the greatest improvement of +1.54 from 8.00 (SD = 1.89) to 9.54 (SD = 1.59) (p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the scores amongst the 2 medical schools. 91% of students agreed that the 3D model had helped them further their understanding of the anatomy of the sarcoma and 87% would want 3D printing models to augment their learning in anatomy. Baseline weaker students demonstrated significantly greater improvement in scores compared with baseline stronger students (mean difference +2.04 vs +0.30, p < 0.001).
conclusion3D printing is an effective teaching adjunct for musculoskeletal oncology surgical anatomy for medical undergraduates and could be used to enhance their understanding and learning experience. 3D models could be integrated in the teaching curriculum of surgical anatomy for undergraduate students.
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.