Anatomical Society core regional anatomy syllabus for undergraduate medicine: the Delphi process

Abstract

A modified Delphi method was employed to seek consensus when revising the UK and Ireland's core syllabus for regional anatomy in undergraduate medicine. A Delphi panel was constructed involving 'expert' (individuals with at least 5 years' experience in teaching medical students anatomy at the level required for graduation). The panel (n = 39) was selected and nominated by members of Council and/or the Education Committee of the Anatomical Society and included a range of specialists including surgeons, radiologists and anatomists. The experts were asked in two stages to 'accept', 'reject' or 'modify' (first stage only) each learning outcome. A third stage, which was not part of the Delphi method, then allowed the original authors of the syllabus to make changes either to correct any anatomical errors or to make minor syntax changes. From the original syllabus of 182 learning outcomes, removing the neuroanatomy component (163), 23 learning outcomes (15%) remained unchanged, seven learning outcomes were removed and two new learning outcomes added. The remaining 133 learning outcomes were modified. All learning outcomes on the new core syllabus achieved over 90% acceptance by the panel.

The Anatomical Society's core anatomy syllabus for undergraduate nursing

“…The Delphi process outlined in Smith et al. () was modified to include a pilot panel of nurse educators, anatomists and clinical educational experts ( n = 9). The role of the pilot panel was to screen the Anatomical Society's Core Regional Anatomy Syllabus for Undergraduate Medicine (Smith et al.…”

“…The role of the pilot panel was to screen the Anatomical Society's Core Regional Anatomy Syllabus for Undergraduate Medicine (Smith et al. ,b) for applicability to nurses, based upon the recommendations within the BiNE () framework. BiNE advised that nursing programmes undertake a system‐based approach to designing and delivering anatomical content.…”

Similarities and differences of a selection of key accreditation standards between chiropractic councils on education: a systematic review

“…Medical education has recognized the need to delineate the subjects, and areas within subjects, required for the purpose of graduating the safe and effective medical practitioner. For example studies have been conducted to try to identify which areas of anatomy constitute the required body of anatomy knowledge [47, 48]. No studies could be identified for purposes of graduating the safe and effective chiropractic practitioner.…”

Eighty Students, Five Cadavers, and Two Professors: Innovative Teaching Practices in an Undergraduate Human Gross Anatomy Course

“…The course is taught using a regional approach and is divided into four units: thorax and abdomen, head and neck, back and upper extremity, and pelvis, perineum and lower extremity. Material covered is based on the Anatomy Society core regional syllabus (Smith et al 2014, Smith et al 2016a, Smith et al 2016b. The course includes a cadaver blessing at the start of the semester and an end of semester cadaver memorial service (Tschering and Reinhard 2011).…”