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,
In 2002, a widely publicized report projected an anatomy educator shortage based on department chairpersons' perceptions. Now, 17 years later, the question lingers: "Does an anatomy educator shortage persist and, if so, how severe is the shortage?" Trends in the number, type, and fill rate of anatomy educator job openings were explored by analyzing United States (U.S.) job postings over the past two years. A survey was distributed to leaders of anatomyrelated departments in the U.S., Canada, and European Union. Most departmental leaders who responded (65% or more) from the U.S./Canada (n = 81) and the European Union (n = 52) anticipate they will have 'moderate' to 'great' difficulty hiring anatomy educators in gross anatomy, histology, and embryology over the next five years. Within the U.S., the number of anatomy educator job postings at medical schools more than doubled from at least 21 postings in 2017 to 52 postings in 2018. Twenty-one percent of postings between 2017 and 2018 were never filled. While the number of anatomy educator openings within the U.S./Canada is perceived to remain in a steady state for the next five years, the European Union estimates a five-fold increase in the number of openings. Departmental leaders prioritize anatomy educator applicants who have teaching experience (mean = 4.64 on 5-point scale), versatility in teaching multiple anatomy disciplines (mean = 3.93), and flexibility in implementing various teaching pedagogies (mean = 3.69). Collectively, these data suggest the shortage of anatomy educators continues in the U.S./Canada and the European Union.
The use of quick response (QR) codes within undergraduate university courses is on the rise, yet literature concerning their use in medical education is scant. This study examined student perceptions on the usefulness of QR codes as learning aids in a medical gross anatomy course, statistically analyzed whether this learning aid impacted student performance, and evaluated whether performance could be explained by the frequency of QR code usage. Question prompts and QR codes tagged on cadaveric specimens and models were available for four weeks as learning aids to medical (n = 155) and doctor of physical therapy (n = 39) students. Each QR code provided answers to posed questions in the form of embedded text or hyperlinked web pages. Students' perceptions were gathered using a formative questionnaire and practical examination scores were used to assess potential gains in student achievement. Overall, students responded positively to the use of QR codes in the gross anatomy laboratory as 89% (57/64) agreed the codes augmented their learning of anatomy. The users' most noticeable objection to using QR codes was the reluctance to bring their smartphones into the gross anatomy laboratory. A comparison between the performance of QR code users and non-users was found to be nonsignificant (P = 0.113), and no significant gains in performance (P = 0.302) were observed after the intervention. Learners welcomed the implementation of QR code technology in the gross anatomy laboratory, yet this intervention had no apparent effect on practical examination performance.
Interest in spatial ability has grown over the past few decades following the emergence of correlational evidence associating spatial aptitude with educational performance in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The research field at large and the anatomy education literature on this topic are mixed. In an attempt to generate consensus, a meta‐analysis was performed to objectively summarize the effects of spatial ability on anatomy assessment performance across multiple studies and populations. Relevant studies published within the past 50 years (1969–2019) were retrieved from eight databases. Study eligibility screening was followed by a full‐text review and data extraction. Use of the Mental Rotations Test (MRT) was required for study inclusion. Out of 2,450 screened records, 15 studies were meta‐analyzed. Seventy‐three percent of studies (11 of 15) were from the United States and Canada, and the majority (9 of 15) studied professional students. Across 15 studies and 1,245 participants, spatial ability was weakly associated with anatomy performance (rpooled = 0.240; CI at 95% = 0.09, 0.38; P = 0.002). Performance on spatial and relationship‐based assessments (i.e., practical assessments and drawing tasks) was correlated with spatial ability, while performance on assessments utilizing non‐spatial multiple‐choice items was not correlated with spatial ability. A significant sex difference was also observed, wherein males outperformed females on spatial ability tasks. Given the role of spatial reasoning in learning anatomy, educators are encouraged to consider curriculum delivery modifications and a comprehensive assessment strategy so as not to disadvantage individuals with low spatial ability.
Faculty qualified to teach in the anatomical sciences are growing scarce just as the need for trained anatomists is greater than ever. Enrollments are surging in anticipation of a large physician shortfall; meanwhile, many anatomists are reaching retirement age. Who will fill the teaching gap? This study assessed trends in doctorates awarded in Anatomy and related fields within the United States (US) since 1969 and evaluated modern graduate education in the anatomical sciences. Data were compiled from the National Science Foundation Survey of Earned Doctorates. The total number of doctorates in the anatomical sciences and number of doctorates by sex and race/ethnicity were plotted for trend analysis. The number of PhD anatomy training programs within US medical schools was also assessed. Curricula and major characteristics of all active programs were evaluated through website searches and program director interviews. While doctorates in cell biology, developmental biology, and neuroscience have grown, the number of PhDs awarded in Anatomy has declined, on average, by 3.1 graduates per year to a 50-year low of only 8 graduates in 2017. Currently, 21 active doctoral programs in anatomy operate within US medical schools and fall into three general categories: anatomy education (n = 8), classic anatomy (n = 8), and anthropology/evolutionary anatomy (n = 5). Without a concerted effort by stakeholders to address the shortage, anatomists may face extinction. Expansion of the anatomy education doctoral degree may represent a necessary evolution of the field to meet job market needs and to thwart the extinction threat. Anat Sci Educ 14: 432-439.
While prior meta-analyses in anatomy education have explored the effects of laboratory pedagogies and histology media on learner performance, the effects of student-centered learning (SCL) and computer-aided instruction (CAI) have not been broadly evaluated. This research sought to answer the question, "How effective are student-centered pedagogies and CAI at increasing student knowledge gains in anatomy compared to traditional didactic approaches?" Relevant studies published within the past 51 years were searched using five databases. Predetermined eligibility criteria were applied to the screening of titles and abstracts to discern their appropriateness for study inclusion. A summary effect size was estimated to determine the effects of SCL and CAI on anatomy performance outcomes. A moderator analysis of study features was also performed. Of the 3,035 records screened, 327 underwent full-text review. Seven studies, which comprised 1,564 participants, were included in the SCL analysis. An additional 19 studies analyzed the effects of CAI in the context of 2,570 participants. Upon comparing SCL to traditional instruction, a small positive effect on learner performance was detected (standardized mean difference (SMD = 0.24; [CI = 0.07, 0.42]; P = 0.006). Likewise, students with CAI exposure moderately outscored those with limited or no access to CAI (SMD = 0.59; [CI = 0.20, 0.98]; P = 0.003). Further analysis of CAI studies identified effects (P ≤ 0.001) for learner population, publication period, interventional approach, and intervention frequency. Overall, learners exposed to SCL and supplemental CAI outperformed their more classically-trained peers as evidenced by increases in short-term knowledge gains. Anat Sci Educ. © 2018 American Association of Anatomists.
Anatomical sciences are foundational to the health professions, yet little is known about the qualifications of anatomy educators at the graduate and professional level in the United States. Moreover, there is concern that the number of qualified anatomy educators being trained may be insufficient to meet the growing demand posed by new and expanded programs in medicine and allied health specialties. The authors surveyed anatomists from across the country to (i) characterize the educational credentials of current anatomy educators and (ii) assess the perceived need for education-focused postdoctoral positions or formal mentorships to prepare anatomists for teaching-intensive faculty positions. To probe the survey responses more deeply, one-on-one interviews were conducted with eight individuals selected to represent a diverse sample of respondents in terms of institution, gender, and academic rank. Results indicate that 30-40% of educators at the graduate level and approximately 60% of those at the undergraduate level lack graduate coursework in histology, embryology, and neuroanatomy. Forty-five percent of respondents had completed a postdoctoral fellowship. Eighty-six percent replied "yes/maybe" to the question of whether an anatomy education postdoctoral fellowship would benefit doctoral graduates. The top 3 reasons for this recommendation were to (i) establish independent educational research, (ii) improve a publication record, and (iii) gain additional teaching experience. Notable weaknesses of education-focused postdoctoral training were related to finances, fear of exploitation, and undervaluing of teaching. Moving forward, postdoctoral fellowships and other forms of postgraduate training may represent a key strategy for training anatomists in the current educational climate. Anat Sci Educ 00: 000-000. © 2018 American Association of Anatomists.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.