OBJECTIVES Cadaver dissection has become the gold-standard for anatomical education in US medical schools. Ethical issues regarding cadavers may not be as obvious as in living patients, which can lead to their potential neglect in medical school curricula. In this study, we assessed the different ethical concerns (ECs) of medical students regarding cadavers in the gross anatomy lab (GAL), gathered student information, including self-reported academic performance (AP) in the GAL, and determined the best predictors for a student's EC. METHODS All second-year medical students at the University of Toledo were invited to complete an anonymous, online-survey. Participants were presented with 10 hypothetical but realistic lab scenarios and asked to rate their EC for each on a 5-point Likert scale. Gender, age, and scores received in the GAL course were also collected. A multiple linear regression model was used to find the best predictors of the total EC score. RESULTS A total of 112 (63%) responses to the online-survey were recorded. The highest EC was for Q7: Taking pictures of the cadaver. The lowest EC was for Q10: The dissection of cadavers itself is an EC. Gender was the best predictor of total EC, followed by age. Female total EC was significantly higher than that for males (35.8 ± 5.5 vs 33.1 ± 7.9). Female scores for Q1 and Q2 were significantly higher than those for males. Total EC for students in the age group 25 to 34 was significantly higher than those in the age group 18 to 24 (35.9 ± 6.1 vs 33.9 ± 7.2). No significant difference was found for individual scenarios. AP was not significantly related to the total score or the scores of the individual scenarios. CONCLUSION The significant differences in ECs of medical students found in our study indicate that not all students have the same outlook towards the GAL specifically and ECs generally.
Background In recent years there has been increased recognition regarding the importance of social determinants of health (SDOH) on health outcomes. Although SDOH awareness is already incorporated into medical education, there is a lack of comprehensive tools available to assess SDOH understanding, attitudes, and application in medicine[1]. By determining the limitations in current medical education, this study aims to address shortcomings in SDOH education to provide optimal care to patients from diverse backgrounds by meeting their individual needs. Methods Participants completed a pre-survey prior to the intervention. Participants were then presented with an educational PowerPoint on the social determinants of health. Post-presentation, participants were divided randomly into small groups to discuss 3 different cases incorporating SDOH. Afterward, they completed a post-survey. Results Participants are statistically significantly more comfortable talking with their future patients after the session on 10 out of 12 topics (the exceptions are gender identity and sexual orientation). These improvements remain significant on 6 topics (i.e., the community they practice, access to care, food insecurity, healthy diet, homelessness, and intimate partner violence) even after multiple comparison corrections using Bonferroni procedure. Conclusion The current study provides evidence that residents benefit from the inclusion of SDOH-specific education in their curriculum as shown by our quantitative assessment.
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.