Comparative learning outcomes of 3D-printed models, real specimens, and 2D materials in veterinary anatomy education: a controlled experimental design with 261 students

Background Veterinary anatomy education has traditionally relied on cadaveric specimens and two-dimensional (2D) educational resources, such as textbooks and atlases. However, ethical, logistical, and biosafety constraints increasingly limit access to cadaveric material, particularly for teaching the anatomy of wild and exotic animals. Advances in three-dimensional (3D) modeling and printing, along with the growing availability of digitized anatomical collections, have expanded the range of educational resources available for anatomy teaching. Nevertheless, comparative evidence regarding the educational effectiveness of these alternative approaches remains limited. This study evaluated whether learning animal osteology using 3D-printed anatomical biomodels yields learning outcomes comparable to those obtained with real anatomical specimens and using only 2D educational materials. Methods A quantitative controlled experimental study was conducted with 261 undergraduate veterinary medicine students, who were categorized according to prior knowledge of osteology into a group with previous anatomy training and a group without prior training. Students were randomly allocated to one of three study methods: 3D-printed anatomical biomodels, real cadaveric specimens, or 2D materials only. All groups received a standardized 45-minute study session, followed by a practical assessment conducted exclusively using real anatomical specimens. Results Students with prior knowledge achieved higher overall scores than those without previous training. Within both subgroups, students who studied using 3D-printed biomodels or real anatomical specimens obtained significantly more correct answers than those who relied exclusively on two-dimensional materials. No significant differences were observed between the 3D biomodel and real specimen groups. Perfect scores were achieved only by students with prior knowledge who studied using 3D biomodels or real specimens. Test completion time and performance did not differ according to gender. Conclusions 3D printed anatomical biomodels yielded learning outcomes comparable to those obtained with real anatomical specimens and superior to those achieved using only two-dimensional materials. These findings support the use of three-dimensional biomodels as a viable and effective educational resource in veterinary anatomy education, particularly in contexts constrained by ethical, logistical, or conservation-related limitations, and highlight their potential to expand access to diverse anatomical specimens.