The Role of Three-dimensional Printed Models in Women’s Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional printing is an innovative technology that has gained prominence in recent years due to its attractive features such as affordability, efficiency, and quick production. The technology is used to produce a three-dimensional model by depositing materials in layers using specific printers. In the medical field, it has been increasingly used in various specialties, including neurosurgery, cardiology, and orthopedics, most commonly for the pre-planning of complex surgeries. In addition, it has been applied in therapeutic treatments, patient education, and training wof medical professionals. In the field of obstetrics and gynecology, there is a limited number of studies in which three-dimensional printed models were applied. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of three-dimensional printing applications in the medical field, highlighting the few reported applications in obstetrics and gynecology. We also review all relevant studies and discuss the current challenges and limitations of adopting the technology in routine clinical practice. The technology has the potential to expand for wider applications related to women's health, including patient counseling, surgical training, and medical education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".