Claims

3D + PBL improves understanding of orthopedic anatomical structures

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q2 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i3 3D + PBL teaching improved students' understanding of orthopedic anatomical structures compared to LBL teaching (SMD = 1.18, 95% CI: 0.71–1.65, P < 0.00001). → Li Ting 2025

Evidence

Li Ting 2025

Li Ting, Hu Yidan, Song Ruohong, Liu Hangyu, Gao Xin, Wang Fei, Xiao Chengwei, Liu Xilin. (2025). Unveiling the ultimate advantage: a meta-analysis of 3D visualization and problem-based learning in orthopedic education. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06654-5

q2 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r3

Meta-analysis of seven RCTs (N = 354) with a random-effects model found "3D + PBL teaching improved students' understanding of orthopedic anatomical structures compared to LBL teaching". GRADE certainty was very low; high heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 74%).

"The meta-analysis indicated that 3D + PBL teaching improved students' understanding of orthopedic anatomical structures compared to LBL teaching (SMD = 1.18, 95% CI: 0.71–1.65, P < 0.00001; see Fig. 5)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.