MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415544249 · doi:10.3138/jvme-2025-0042

Use of Three-Dimensional Printed Anatomical Models to Enhance Veterinary Students’ Interpretation of Computed Tomography Scans in Dogs With a Congenital Extrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt

2025· article· en· W4415544249 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Éverton Oliveira Calixto, Érika Toledo da Fonseca, Anna Luiza Campos Pollon, Antônio Chaves de Assís Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputed tomographyDissection (medical)Portosystemic shuntModality (human–computer interaction)Clinical significanceClinical Practice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of three-dimensional (3D)-printed canine anatomical models as tools to support veterinary students in interpreting computed tomography (CT) scans of dogs with congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (CEPSs). Two canine anatomical models were produced: one representing normal anatomy and another depicting a splenocaval CEPS. These models were generated using CT scans from clinical cases. A total of 114 third-year veterinary students participated and were randomly assigned to either a control group (CG; n = 60) or a 3D model group (3DG; n = 54). All students underwent theoretical and practical training sessions related to CT imaging and CEPSs anatomy. Instruction was delivered through oral presentations supported by slides and illustrative images. The training included handling CT scans without CEPSs and anatomical dissection of abdominal cavities in canine or feline cadavers. Only the 3DG students used the 3D-printed models throughout all phases, including during questionnaire completion. Students’ performance was assessed via a questionnaire that was administered at the end of the training sessions and accessed via a quick-response (QR) code. The questionnaire required students to identify and classify the CEPS, record their perceived difficulty, and indicate the primary imaging modality used to complete the task (multiplanar reconstruction, volume rendering, or 3D-printed anatomical models). Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher's exact test and the Mann–Whitney U test, with significance set at p < 0.05. Results showed significantly higher diagnostic accuracy in the 3DG (94.4%) compared to the CG (31.7%). The 3DG reported a moderate level of difficulty, whereas the CG perceived the task as difficult. Most students in the 3DG used the 3D-printed anatomical models (75.93%), whereas the majority in the CG relied on volume rendering (95.00%). These findings suggest that 3D-printed anatomical models can enhance students’ diagnostic accuracy and reduce the perceived difficulty of interpreting complex CT images.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical EducationSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207