↓ Skip to main content

Three-dimensional printing models in congenital heart disease education for medical students: a controlled comparative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Three-dimensional printing models in congenital heart disease education for medical students: a controlled comparative study
Published in
BMC Medical Education, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12909-018-1293-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wei Su, Yunbin Xiao, Siping He, Peng Huang, Xicheng Deng

Abstract

This study sought to assess, using subjective (self-assessment) and objective (MCQ) methods, the efficacy of using heart models with ventricular septal defect lesions produced with three-dimensional printing technology in a congenital heart disease curriculum for medical students. Three computed tomography datasets of three subtypes of ventricular septal defects (perimembranous, subarterial and muscular, one for each) were obtained and processed for building into and printing out 3D models. Then a total of 63 medical students in one class were randomly allocated to two groups (32 students in the experimental, and 31 the control). The two groups participated in a seminar with or without a 3D heart model, respectively. Assessment of this curriculum was carried out using Likert-type questionnaires as well as an objective multiple choice question test assessing both knowledge acquisition, and structural conceptualization. Open-ended questions were also provided for getting advice and suggestion on 3D model utilization in CHD education. With these 3D models, feedback shown in the questionnaires from students in experimental group was significantly more positive than their classmates in the control. And the test results also showed a significant difference in structural conceptualization in favor of the experimental group. It is effective to use heart models created using current 3D printing technology for congenital heart disease education. It stimulates students' interest in congenital heart disease and improves the outcomes of medical education.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 135 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 19%
Researcher 15 11%
Student > Master 15 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 7 5%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 43 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Engineering 10 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 51 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2018.
All research outputs
#15,542,250
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,298
of 3,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,118
of 331,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#55
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,387 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.