Groups using 3DPAMs achieved significantly better test results than groups using dry bones, with one mixed result on MCQs¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Studies by Cai and Smith found significantly better test results for groups who used 3DPAMs compared with dry bones. → Brumpt Eléonore 2023 q2 i? Chen et al. found 3DPAM students better at recognizing skull structures but no difference in MCQ results. → Brumpt Eléonore 2023 (2)

Evidence¶

Brumpt Eléonore 2023¶

Brumpt Eléonore, Bertin Eugénie, Tatu Laurent, Louvrier Aurélien. (2023). 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04744-w

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review reports, citing Cai et al. and Smith et al., comparisons against dry bones: "significantly better test results for the groups who used 3DPAM"; no effect sizes are printed.

"The studies by Cai and Smith found significantly better test results for the groups who used 3DPAM [51, 63]."

Brumpt Eléonore 2023 (2)¶

Brumpt Eléonore, Bertin Eugénie, Tatu Laurent, Louvrier Aurélien. (2023). 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04744-w

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review reports, citing Chen et al., that 3DPAM students were "better at recognizing structures (skull)" with "no difference in MCQ results", a mixed pattern across outcome measures.

"Chen and colleagues specified that students who used the 3D model were better at recognizing structures (skull) but that there was no difference in MCQ results [69]."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Meta-analyses report better post-test results for 3DPAM instruction, especially for complex anatomical structures and medical students — related
• 3DPAMs were significantly more effective than plastinated prosections for learning anatomy in two reviewed studies — related
• 3DPAM production costs ranged from 1.25 to 2800 USD per model, and eleven studies concluded 3D printing costs less than plastinated or commercial models — related
• In seven reviewed studies 3DPAMs were not superior to other models on student knowledge tests — reports the opposite
• One hour of learning with a lower-limb 3DPAM showed no significant difference from one hour of dissection on the same area — related