The ability to mentally manipulate objects in three dimensions is essential to the practice of many clinical medical specialties. The relationship between this type of visual-spatial ability and performance in preclinical courses such as medical gross anatomy is poorly understood. This study determined if visual-spatial ability is associated with performance on practical examinations, and if students' visual-spatial ability improves during medical gross anatomy. Three hundred and fifty-two first-year medical students completed the Mental Rotations Test (MRT) before the gross anatomy course and 255 at its completion in 2008 and 2009. Hypotheses were tested using logistic regression analysis and Student's t-test. Compared with students in the lowest quartile of the MRT, students who scored in the highest quartile of the MRT were 2.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 and 3.8] and 2.1 (95% CI 1.2 and 3.5) times more likely to score greater than 90% on practical examinations and on both practical and written examinations, respectively. MRT scores for males and females increased significantly (P < 0.0001). Measurement of students' pre-existing visual-spatial ability is predictive of performance in medical gross anatomy, and early intervention may be useful for students with low visual-spatial ability on entry to medical school. Participation in medical gross anatomy increases students' visual-spatial ability, although the mechanism for this phenomenon is unknown.
Radiological images show anatomical structures in multiple planes and may be effective for teaching anatomical spatial relationships, something that students often find difficult to master. This study tests the hypotheses that (1) the use of cadaveric computed tomography (CT) scans in the anatomy laboratory is positively associated with performance in the gross anatomy course and (2) dissection of the CT-scanned cadaver is positively associated with performance on this course. One hundred and seventy-nine first-year medical students enrolled in gross anatomy at Boston University School of Medicine were provided with CT scans of four cadavers, and students were given the opportunity to choose whether or not to use these images. The hypotheses were tested using logistic regression analysis adjusting for student demographic characteristics. Students who used the CT scans were more likely to score greater than 90% as an average practical examination score (odds ratio OR 3.6; 95% CI 1.4, 9.2), final course grade (OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.01, 6.8), and on spatial anatomy examination questions (OR 2.4; 95% CI 1.03, 5.6) than were students who did not use the CT scans. There were no differences in performance between students who dissected the scanned cadavers and those who dissected a different cadaver. These results demonstrate that the use of CT scans in medical gross anatomy is predictive of performance in the course and on questions requiring knowledge of anatomical spatial relationships, but it is not necessary to scan the actual cadaver dissected by each student.
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.
Active learning exercises were developed to allow advanced medical students to revisit and review anatomy in a clinically meaningful context. In our curriculum, students learn anatomy two to three years before they participate in the radiology clerkship. These educational exercises are designed to review anatomy content while highlighting its relevance to the study of radiology. Laboratory exercises were developed using inexpensive materials in the form of hands-on stations designed for use by students working together in small groups. Station exercises include model building, exploring relevant radiological imaging, and practicing clinical techniques. Students are encouraged to move from abstract conceptualization of the anatomy using models to applying knowledge to living tissues by using a portable ultrasound to explore superficial anatomy on each other. Stations are designed to integrate knowledge and reemphasize concepts in different contexts, so that upon completion students have a reinforced understanding of the three-dimensional anatomy of the region in question, the appearance of the anatomy on radiological images, and an appreciation of the relevance of the anatomy to radiological procedures.
There is growing demand from accrediting agencies for improved basic science integration into fourth‐year medical curricula and inculcation of medical students with teaching skills. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a fourth‐year medical school elective course focused on teaching gross anatomy on anatomical knowledge and teaching confidence. Fourth‐year medical student “teacher” participants' gross anatomy knowledge was assessed before and after the course. Students rated their overall perceived anatomy knowledge and teaching skills on a scale from 0 (worst) to 10 (best), and responded to specific knowledge and teaching confidence items using a similar scale. First‐year students were surveyed to evaluate the effectiveness of the fourth‐year student teaching on their learning. Thirty‐two students completed the course. The mean anatomy knowledge pretest score and posttest scores were 43.2 (±22.1) and 74.1 (±18.4), respectively (P < 0.001). The mean perceived anatomy knowledge ratings before and after the course were 6.19 (±1.84) and 7.84 (±1.30), respectively (P < 0.0001) and mean perceived teaching skills ratings before and after the course were 7.94 (±1.24) and 8.53 (±0.95), respectively (P = 0.002). Student feedback highlighted five themes which impacted fourth‐year teaching assistant effectiveness, including social/cognitive congruence and improved access to learning opportunities. Together these results suggest that integrating fourth‐year medical students in anatomy teaching increases their anatomical knowledge and improves measures of perceived confidence in both teaching and anatomy knowledge. The thematic analysis revealed that this initiative has positive benefits for first‐year students.
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.