Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: a review of the evidence

Winkelmann, Andreas

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02625.x

Cited by 338 publications

(321 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(67 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

297

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This meta-analysis revealed that speculations drawn from prior thematic reviews do not accurately depict the breadth of available evidence. Contrary to the notion that dissection shows a slight advantage over prosection (Winkelmann, 2007), our findings suggest there are no immediate benefits of implementing dissection over other instructional modalities in terms of learner achievement, as Interestingly, historical evidence suggests a profound role for dissection in health professions education. This is evidenced, in part, by the reversal of the decade old "trend" to discontinue cadaveric dissection.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…A number of published studies have attempted to address these questions and, in doing so, have regularly praised the role of dissection. These studies, however, are often grounded in students' and/or educators' perceptions (Alagna et al, 1982;Kramer and Soley, 2002), rely on anecdotal evidence (Moore, 1998;Aziz et al, 2002;Miller et al, 2002), are fraught with presumed researcher bias (Winkelmann, 2007), or lack the necessary power to make generalizable conclusions (Winkelmann, 2007). Inevitably, interpreting such studies in isolation, or without the proper methodological context, can result in a skewed representation of the empirical evidence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A meta‐analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The debate regarding anatomy laboratory teaching approaches is ongoing and controversial. To date, the literature has yielded only speculative conclusions because of general methodological weaknesses and a lack of summative empirical evidence. Through a meta-analysis, this study compared the effectiveness of instructional laboratory approaches used in anatomy education to objectively and more conclusively synthesize the existing literature. Studies published between January 1965 and December 2015 were searched through five databases. Titles and abstracts of the retrieved records were screened using eligibility criteria to determine their appropriateness for study inclusion. Only numerical data were extracted for analysis. A summary effect size was estimated to determine the effects of laboratory pedagogies on learner performance and perceptions data were compiled to provide additional context. Of the 3,035 records screened, 327 underwent full-text review. Twenty-seven studies, comprising a total of 7,731 participants, were included in the analysis. The meta-analysis detected no effect (standardized mean difference 5 20.03; 95% CI 5 20.16 to 0.10; P 5 0.62) on learner performance. Additionally, a moderator analysis detected no effects (P 0.16) for study design, learner population, intervention length, or specimen type. Across studies, student performance on knowledge examinations was equivalent regardless of being exposed to either dissection or another laboratory instructional strategy. This was true of every comparison investigated (i.e., dissection vs. prosection, dissection vs. digital media, dissection vs. models/modeling, and dissection vs. hybrid). In the context of short-term knowledge gains alone,

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A meta‐analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Likewise, Hindura et al, when comparing a conventional preparatory course with a purely integrative one, discovered that integrative learning alone is less efficient [16,17]. Integrative learning can supplement, but not replace the preparatory course [18]. In this respect we are also in agreement with Evans and Watt [19] who promote the idea that a good medical education requires the proper combination of basic learning and clinical knowledge.…”

supporting

confidence: 75%

Radiological Anatomy - Evaluation of Integrative Education in Radiology

Dettmer

Schmiedl

Meyer

et al. 2013

Fortschr Röntgenstr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

!Purpose: Evaluation and analysis of the integrative course "Radiological Anatomy" established since 2007 at the Medical School Hannover (MHH) in comparison with conventional education. Materials and Methods: Anatomy and radiology are usually taught separately with a considerable time lag. Interdisciplinary teaching of these associated subjects seems logical for several reasons. Therefore, the integrative course "Radiological Anatomy" was established in the second year of medical education, combining these two closely related subjects. This interdisciplinary course was retrospectively evaluated by consideration of a student questionnaire and staff observations. The advantages and disadvantages of integrative teaching in medical education are discussed. Results: The course ratings were excellent (median 1; mean 1.3 on a scale of 1 to 6). This is significantly (p < 0.001) better than the average of all evaluated courses in the respective term (grade 2.8). The course improved the anatomical comprehension (90 %) and the students stated that the topics were relevant for their future medical education (90 %). Furthermore, interest in the subject's anatomy and radiology increased during the course (88 %). According to the students' suggestions the course was enhanced by a visitation in the Department of Radiology and the additional topic central nervous system. Conclusion: Integrative teaching of anatomy and radiology was well received by the students. Both, anatomical and radiological comprehension and the motivation to learn were improved. However, it should be considered, that the amount of work and time required by the teaching staff is considerably increased compared to traditional teaching.

show abstract

“…Multiple reports compare problem-based learning (Azer and Eizenberg, 2007), peer teaching (Krych et al, 2005;Evans and Cuffe, 2009), team-based learning (Nieder et al, 2005), computer or web-based teaching materials (Bryner et al, 2008;Petersson et al, 2009), and clinical skills (Dusseau et al, 2008) with traditional dissection methodology. Winkelmann (2007) reviewed several novel teaching methods and found that they were mostly judged to be ''not disadvantageous'' while at the same time not achieving significantly better results than traditional teaching methods on comparable examinations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The gross anatomy course: An analysis of its importance

Böckers

Jerg-Bretzke

Lamp

et al. 2010

Anatomical Sciences Ed

177

183

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The gross anatomy dissection course is a cost-intensive piece of undergraduate medical education that students and professionals alike describe as very important within the overall medical curriculum. We sought to understand more explicitly students' valuation of gross anatomy as an ''important'' course and so developed a quantitative longitudinal questionnaire. Medical students (n 5 124) enrolled in the winter term 2006/2007 gross anatomy course at the Ulm University Faculty of Medicine were surveyed anonymously prior to, in the middle of, and at the end of the dissection course. Subgroups of students expressing rising or falling opinions of course value were identified and correlated with student opinions about the course's ability to convey professional competencies. Fivepoint Likert scales were used for each survey item, which included such standardized instruments as the NeoFFI, BSI, and FBM. The study confirmed that medical students believe dissection to be valuable. Students indicated that participation in the course facilitated acquisition of anatomy knowledge as well as skills related to teamwork, coping with stress, and, to a lesser extent, time management. Students also noted that they developed less empathy than expected beforehand. Significant subgroup differences were observed relative to the competencies of teamwork, stress coping strategies, and empathy, as well as in students' stress levels associated with having to take a dissection course. Our study builds on previous work that has shown dissection courses help students develop professional competencies. The increase in professionalism might be a reason for the generally high value students place on the gross anatomy dissection course, Anat Sci Educ 3:3-11, 2010.

show abstract

Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: a review of the evidence

Cited by 338 publications

References 38 publications

A meta‐analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies

A meta‐analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies

Radiological Anatomy - Evaluation of Integrative Education in Radiology

The gross anatomy course: An analysis of its importance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About