Claims

3D visualisation training outperformed traditional teaching on exam outcomes and clinical practice assessment (Shao et al.)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · 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.

q3 i? In a three-group randomised study of 60 clinical students, the hand-held scanner 3D imaging group outperformed the traditional teaching group on exam outcomes, clinical practice assessment and teacher satisfaction. → K Anniesmitha 2026

Evidence

K Anniesmitha 2026

K Anniesmitha, Rao K G Mohandas, Aithal P Ashwini, Bandekar Nikita N., Mandal Tatiyana, George Bincy M. (2026). Effectiveness of technology-enhanced learning in neuroanatomy education among health professionals - a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-09764-w

q3 · i? · review · r3

Study of 60 clinical students randomised across traditional instruction, hand-held scanner 3D imaging and 2D-fitting 3D methods, assessed by objective exam papers and subjective questionnaires. The 3D scanner group "outperformed the traditional teaching group (P < 0.01)".

"In terms of exam outcomes, clinical practice assessment, and teacher satisfaction, the hand-held scanner 3D imaging group outperformed the traditional teaching group (P < 0.01)."

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.