A validated instrument measuring students' perceptions on plastinated and three‐dimensional printed anatomy tools

Chandrasekaran, Ramya; Radzi, Shairah; Kai, Peh Zhen; Rajalingam, Preman; Rotgans, Jerome I.; Mogali, Sreenivasulu Reddy

doi:10.1002/ase.2147

Cited by 4 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, this study differs from the two previous papers in terms of its aim/research question, data and methods used for analysis in order to gain deep insights into the students' qualitative feedbacks (free-text comments plus focus group discussions) regarding the use of 3DP tools compared to plastinated specimens. This implies that the current study fundamentally addresses the different research question from the preceding two articles [21,40].…”

Section: Study Goalsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…This qualitative study is connected to two previous quantitative papers [21,40], in that the data presented in all three studies was collected simultaneously from the same sample of student participants. The first paper demonstrated similar objective performances (test scores) between plastinated and 3DP groups [21], whereas, the second paper used factor analysis to develop a psychometrically validated instrument (four factors,19 items) that measured the educational constructs such as learning satisfaction, self-efficacy, humanistic valus and limitation of the learning tools [40]. This study explores the qualitative open-ended and focus group discussions to probe the question of what students consider important for the learning anatomy with the plastinated specimens and 3D printed models.…”

Section: Study Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Students’ learning experiences of three-dimensional printed models and plastinated specimens: a qualitative analysis

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Traditional cadaveric dissection is declining whilst plastinated and three-dimensional printed (3DP) models are increasingly popular as substitutes to the conventional anatomy teaching and learning methods. It is unclear about the pros and cons of these new tools and how they impact students’ learning experiences of anatomy including humanistic values such as respect, care and empathy. Methods Ninety-six students’ views were sought immediately after a randomized cross-over study. Pragmatic design was used to investigate the learning experiences of using plastinated and 3DP models of cardiac (in Phase 1, n = 63) and neck (in Phase 2, n = 33) anatomy. Inductive thematic analysis was conducted based on 278 free text comments (related to strengths, weaknesses, things to improve), and focus group (n = 8) transcriptions in full verbatim about learning anatomy with these tools. Results Four themes were found: perceived authenticity, basic understanding versus complexity, attitudes towards respect and care, and multimodality and guidance. Conclusions Overall, students perceived plastinated specimens as more real and authentic, thus perceived more respect and care than 3DP models; whereas 3DP models were easy to use and prefered for learning basic anatomy.

show abstract

Section: Study Goalsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Study Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Students’ learning experiences of three-dimensional printed models and plastinated specimens: a qualitative analysis

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 19 (63%) studies, the learning effectiveness of medical school students in anatomy education with mobile applications was investigated, and positive feedback was received from the students. In addition, students said that learning is more permanent and takes place in a shorter time (Bork et al, 2021;Chandrasekaran et al, 2021;Fernández-Alemán, Lopez-Gonzalez, et al, 2016;Gnanasegaram et al, 2020;Golenhofen et al, 2020;Harmon, Burgoon, & Kalmar, 2022;Jamali et al, 2015;Kurniawan & Witjaksono, 2018;Küçük et al, 2016;Lazarus et al, 2017;Mayfield, Ohara, & O'Sullivan, 2013;Mogali et al, 2019;Morris et al, 2016;Pickering, 2015;Raney, 2016;Stewart & Choudhury, 2015;Stirling & Birt, 2014;Traser et al, 2015;Wilkinson et al, 2020). However, in 6 (20%) studies, students stated that cadaveric education was easier, internet access outside the school was problematic, they had difficulty in downloading programs to their personal devices and they could not use the programs because they were paid.…”

Section: The Effect Of Anatomy Learning With a Mobile Application On ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When we look at the studies researched in this systematic article, Gross anatomy mostly constitutes anatomy subjects in mobile learning. It examines the skeleton, muscle, joint, nervous system, all organ structures, and body parts as content (Bork et al, 2021;Chakraborty & Cooperstein, 2018;Chandrasekaran et al, 2021;Fernández-Alemán, López-González, et al, 2016;Fernández-Alemán, Lopez-Gonzalez, et al, 2016;Havens et al, 2020;Jamali et al, 2015;Kurniawan & Witjaksono, 2018;Lazarus et al, 2017;Mayfield et al, 2013;Mogali et al, 2019;Raney, 2016;Traser et al, 2015;Wilkinson & Barter, 2016;Wilkinson et al, 2020). Other studies also include neuroanatomy, microanatomy, and embryology (Golenhofen et al, 2020;Lazarus et al, 2017;Mogali et al, 2019;Wilkinson & Barter, 2016;Wilkinson et al, 2020).…”

Section: Negative Consequences Of Mobile Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anatomi eğitiminde mobil öğrenmenin öğrencilerin öğrenme becerileri ve motivasyonuna etkisi: sistematik derleme

ERBEK

Bolatlı

2022

EJOSAT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technologies that facilitate the understanding of anatomical structures are advantageous for students compared to classical methods. It is known that mobile learning and 3D visualization methods are very useful in terms of students' perception, satisfaction, and usability. The general purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the studies investigating the effects of mobile learning in anatomy education. Electronic databases such as Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science were used in the research. The use of mobile applications in anatomy education Scans published after 2013 was reviewed. Research studies containing information about mobile applications used in anatomy education were analyzed using the keywords 'anatomy education' and 'mobile learning'. Data were collected for the study between January 10 and March 29, 2022. In this context, 12,220 articles were reached due to electronic scans. In the research, 779 scientific publications were reached in terms of appropriateness, and 30 were found to be related to the subject of the study and were considered. In 20 (66%) studies examined within the scope of systematic review, it was stated that mobile learning facilitates three-dimensional learning and it is motivating and fun. In 19 (63%) studies, the learning activity of medical faculty students in anatomy education with mobile applications was investigated, and positive feedback was received from the students. However, in 6 (20%) studies, students stated that cadaveric education was easier, internet access outside the school was problematic, they had difficulty in downloading programs to their personal devices and they could not use the programs because they were paid. 6 (20%) of 30 studies are applications made with AR. In 8 (26%) of the studies, it was seen that the final exam results of the students who learned anatomy with mobile application got higher scores than the students who learned with the traditional method. Examined articles have shown that mobile learning techniques used for anatomy education in the classroom, in the laboratory, and outside the classroom increase success and are more motivating than traditional learning methods. It has been seen that AR programs provide the most success among mobile applications and do not negatively affect student success.

show abstract

“…Due to the modernization of the medical curriculum and the advancement of technology, medical anatomy education has gone beyond mere autopsy. Plasticizing technology and 3DP technology are gaining importance ( Chandrasekaran et al, 2021 ), and with the progress of science and technology, 3DP has gradually entered medical education ( Ye et al, 2020 ). For example, 3D-printed anatomical models can replace cadavers or human anatomical structures as teaching tools for medical students or young clinical doctors, as real cadavers have many deficiencies in practical medical teaching.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education

Jiang

Bai

et al. 2023

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three-dimensional printing models (3DPs) have been widely used in medical anatomy training. However, the 3DPs evaluation results differ depending on such factors as the training objects, experimental design, organ parts, and test content. Thus, this systematic evaluation was carried out to better understand the role of 3DPs in different populations and different experimental designs. Controlled (CON) studies of 3DPs were retrieved from PubMed and Web of Science databases, where the participants were medical students or residents. The teaching content is the anatomical knowledge of human organs. One evaluation indicator is the mastery of anatomical knowledge after training, and the other is the satisfaction of participants with 3DPs. On the whole, the performance of the 3DPs group was higher than that of the CON group; however, there was no statistical difference in the resident subgroup, and there was no statistical difference for 3DPs vs. 3D visual imaging (3DI). In terms of satisfaction rate, the summary data showed that the difference between the 3DPs group (83.6%) vs. the CON group (69.6%) (binary variable) was not statistically significant, with p > 0.05. 3DPs has a positive effect on anatomy teaching, although there are no statistical differences in the performance tests of individual subgroups; participants generally had good evaluations and satisfaction with 3DPs. 3DPs still faces challenges in production cost, raw material source, authenticity, durability, etc. The future of 3D-printing-model-assisted anatomy teaching is worthy of expectation.

show abstract

A validated instrument measuring students' perceptions on plastinated and three‐dimensional printed anatomy tools

Abstract: Cadaveric dissection is often considered a defining feature of anatomy teaching and learning (Aziz et al., 2002;Sugand et al., 2010;Ghosh, 2017a). However, there has been a growing interest in various new anatomy tools such as three-dimensional printed (3DP) models

Cited by 4 publications

References 114 publications

Students’ learning experiences of three-dimensional printed models and plastinated specimens: a qualitative analysis

Students’ learning experiences of three-dimensional printed models and plastinated specimens: a qualitative analysis

Anatomi eğitiminde mobil öğrenmenin öğrencilerin öğrenme becerileri ve motivasyonuna etkisi: sistematik derleme

Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About