Evaluation of 3D-Printed Feline Skull Models as Educational Tools for Radiographic Interpretation of Craniomaxillofacial Traumatic Injuries: A Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D)-printed models have been shown to improve medical students' understanding of anatomy and related fractures. The aim of this parallel-group randomized trial was to evaluate the impact of 3D-printed feline skulls, in addition to traditional teaching, on veterinary students' interpretation of skull radiographs. Students were randomly divided into two groups (2D, 3D) and underwent a pre-test consisting of multiple-choice questions. Subsequently, both groups watched a recorded lesson on feline skull radiographic anatomy and traumatic lesions, and then the 3D group was provided with 3D-printed skulls, normal and with traumatic lesions. Finally, all students underwent a post-test. The multiple-choice questions included orthogonal feline skull radiographs of three different patterns of traumatic lesions, and questions tested their knowledge of normal anatomy and recognition of traumatic lesions. Twenty-three (25.6%) fourth-year and 67 (74.4%) fifth-year students participated. For both the 2D and 3D groups, post-test scores were significantly better than pre-test scores. There were no significant differences in the pre-test and post-test scores between the 2D and 3D groups. Three-dimensional-printed models did not improve veterinary students' ability to recognize anatomical structures and traumatic lesions of the feline skull. Further studies are warranted to define the role of 3D-printed models in veterinary student learning.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".