BMC Med Educ. 2026 May 23. doi: 10.1186/s12909-026-09525-9. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Anatomy teaching in preclinical medical education has become increasingly compressed, making it more difficult for students to integrate foundational anatomical knowledge with clinical reasoning. Upper limb nerve lesions are particularly challenging to learn because they require spatial understanding and application of structure-function relationships, yet students often struggle to translate two-dimensional instructional materials into clinical reasoning. This study presents a preliminary evaluation of a medical student-developed, three-dimensional (3D) interactive simulation designed to model upper limb nerve lesions and their associated motor, sensory, and reflex deficits.
METHODS: First-year medical students who had completed the standard anatomy curriculum participated in a single-session pilot study with room-level random allocation comparing a traditional PowerPoint-based review (2D Review Group) with an interactive simulation (3D Simulation Group). Both groups completed identical worksheets and a five-item multiple-choice pre- and post-test assessing clinical application of anatomy knowledge. Post-session surveys evaluated perceived clarity, clinical relevance, and educational value. Knowledge gains were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests with effect size calculations, and open-ended survey responses were analyzed using Reflexive Thematic Analysis (RTA) following Braun and Clarke.
RESULTS: A total of 35 students participated, with 33 included in the knowledge gain analysis. Both instructional groups showed improvement on the post-test. Although differences in change scores were not statistically significant (U = 165.00, p = .274), the 3D Simulation Group showed a larger median gain and reached similar post-test scores to the 2D Review Group despite lower baseline performance. Survey responses did not differ significantly between groups. Qualitative feedback suggested differing learner priorities across instructional modalities, with participants in the 3D Simulation Group emphasizing visual-spatial support and interactivity, and participants in the 2D Review Group emphasizing structured review and practice questions.
DISCUSSION: Given the single-session design, these findings should be interpreted as exploratory. However, they suggest that interactive 3D simulation may support conceptual understanding and application of anatomical knowledge, particularly for learners with lower baseline knowledge.
CONCLUSION: This study supports the feasibility of a student-led, AI-assisted approach to developing adaptable educational tools within a medical curriculum. Although quantitative differences were modest, qualitative feedback suggests that learners valued the tool’s support for clinical reasoning and spatial understanding. Further longitudinal and multi-session research is needed to evaluate retention, scalability, and educational impact.
PMID:42177489 | DOI:10.1186/s12909-026-09525-9
