The development of a core syllabus for the teaching of head and neck anatomy to medical students

Abstract

The study of human anatomy has traditionally served as a fundamental component in the basic science education of medical students, yet there exists a remarkable lack of firm guidance on essential features that must be included in a gross anatomy course, which would constitute a "Core Syllabus" of absolutely mandatory structures and related clinical pathologies. While universal agreement on the details of a core syllabus is elusive, there is a general consensus that a core syllabus aims to identify the minimum level of knowledge expected of recently qualified medical graduates in order to carry out clinical procedures safely and effectively, while avoiding overloading students with unnecessary facts that have less immediate application to their future careers as clinicians. This paper aims to identify consensus standards of essential features of Head and Neck anatomy via a Delphi Panel consisting of anatomists and clinicians who evaluated syllabus content structures (greater than 1,000) as "essential", "important", "acceptable", or "not required." The goal is to provide guidance for program/course directors who intend to provide the optimal balance between establishing a comprehensive list of clinically relevant essential structures and an overwhelming litany, which would otherwise overburden trainees in their initial years of medical school with superficial rote learning, which potentially dilutes the key and enduring fundamental lessons that prepare students for training in any medical field.

Is the decline of human anatomy hazardous to medical education/profession?—A review

“…One solution to focusing anatomy for the clinical realm is to develop core curricula for the anatomical sciences. For example, a recent core curriculum for the teaching of head and neck anatomy to medical students has been proposed [33].…”

A critique of utilitarian and instrumentalist concepts for the teaching of gross anatomy to medical and dental students: Provoking debate

“…More specialized syllabuses for the medical curriculum (but not yet for the dental curriculum) have been reported by Tubbs et al () and Tubbs and Paulk () for the head and neck, by Moxham et al (, b) for neuroanatomy and by Fakoya et al () for embryology and teratology (see also Leonard et al () for developmental anatomy). With the exception of the syllabus by Leonard et al (2000), these syllabuses belong to a proposed series of core syllabuses published by the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists (IFAA) using Delphi panel methodologies outlined by Moxham et al ().…”

The Anatomical Society’s Core Anatomy Syllabus for Dental Undergraduates

“…It should be recognised that core syllabuses are also being devised by the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists (IFAA; Tubbs et al ; Moxham et al , ; Tubbs & Paulk, ; Fakoya et al ; Webb et al ). These do not use learning outcomes but, rather, are presented as lists of topics.…”