There is increasingly a call for clinical relevance in the teaching of the biomedical sciences within all health care programs. This presupposes that there is an understanding of what is "core" material within the curriculum. To date, the anatomical sciences have been poorly served by the development of core syllabuses, although there have been commendable attempts to define a core syllabus for gross anatomy in medicine and for some medical specialties. The International Federation of Associations of Anatomists and the European Federation for Experimental Morphology aim to formulate, on an international basis, core syllabuses for all branches of the anatomical sciences. This is being undertaken at the initial stage using Delphi Panels consisting of a team of anatomists, scientists, and clinicians who evaluate syllabus content and accord each element/topic "essential," "important," "acceptable," or "not required" status. Their initial conjectures, published on the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists' website, provide merely a framework to enable anatomical (and other cognate learned) societies and individual anatomists, clinicians, and students to comment upon the syllabuses. This article presents the concepts and methodological approaches underlying the hybrid Delphi process employed. Preliminary findings relating to the development of a neuroanatomy core syllabus are provided to illustrate the methods initially employed by a Delphi Panel. The approach is novel in that it is international in scope, is conceptually democratic, and is developmentally fluid in terms of availability for amendment. The aim is to set internationally recognized standards and thus to provide guidelines concerning anatomical knowledge when engaged in course development.

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 syllabus for anatomy (2003 and later refined in 2007) set out a series of learning outcomes that an individual medical student should achieve on graduation. The core syllabus, with 182 learning outcomes grouped in body regions, referenced in the General Medical Council's Teaching Tomorrow's Doctors, was open to criticism on the grounds that the learning outcomes were generated by a relatively small group of anatomists, albeit some of whom were clinically qualified. We have therefore used a modified Delphi technique to seek a wider consensus. A Delphi panel was constructed involving 'experts' (n = 39). The revised core syllabus of 156 learning outcomes presented here is applicable to all medical programmes and may be used by curriculum planners, teachers and students alike in addressing the perennial question: 'What do I need to know ?'

Background: A national survey was undertaken to establish a baseline of our final year students' perception of how their undergraduate oral surgery education has equipped them for key areas of general dental practice.

Variations in the origin of STA and SLA from the carotid arterial tree and the similarity of their diameters mean that there is a significant possibility of their misidentified during surgery.

This study set out to ascertain whether the context in which anatomy is learnt made a difference to students' perceptions of learning. An Approach to Learning Inventory (ASSIST) and a 31-item Anatomy Learning Experience Questionnaire (ALE) were administered to 224 students (77 dental, 132 medical and 19 speech and language) as a multi-site study. Results revealed that 45% adopted a strategic, 39% a deep and 14% a surface approach. Trends between professions are similar for a deep or strategic approach (both~40%). However, a surface approach differed between professions (7% dentistry, 16% medicine, 26% speech and language science). Dental students responded more to being able to use their knowledge than did other groups (P = 0.0001). Medical students found the dissecting environment an intimidating one and subsequently reported finding online resources helpful (P = 0.015 and P = 0.003, respectively). Speech and language science students reported that they experienced greater difficulties with learning anatomy; they reported finding the amount to learn daunting (P = 0.007), struggled to remember what they did last semester (P = 0.032) and were not confident in their knowledge base (P = 0.0001). All students responded strongly to the statement 'I feel that working with cadaveric material is an important part of becoming a doctor/dentist/health care professional'. A strong response to this statement was associated with students adopting a deep approach (P = 0.0001). This study has elucidated that local curriculum factors are important in creating an enabling learning environment. There are also a number of generic issues that can be identified as being inherent in the learning of anatomy as a discipline and are experienced across courses, different student groups and institutions.

There is increasingly a call for clinical relevance in the teaching of biomedical sciences within all health care courses. However, this presupposes that there is a clear understanding of what can be considered core material within the curricula. To date, the anatomical sciences have been relatively poorly served by the development of core syllabuses, particularly for specialized core syllabuses such as neuroanatomy. One of the aims of the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists (IFAA) and of the European Federation for Experimental Morphology (EFEM) is to formulate, on an international scale, core syllabuses for all branches of the anatomical sciences using Delphi Panels consisting of anatomists, scientists, and clinicians to initially evaluate syllabus content. In this article, the findings of a Delphi Panel for neuroanatomy are provided. These findings will subsequently be published on the IFAA website to enable anatomical (and other cognate learned) societies and individual anatomists, clinicians, and students to freely comment upon, and elaborate and amend, the syllabuses. The aim is to set internationally recognized standards and thus to provide guidelines concerning neuroanatomical knowledge when engaged in course development.

The larynx serves respiratory, protective, and phonatory functions. The motor and sensory innervation to the larynx controlling these functions is provided by the superior laryngeal nerve (SLN) and the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN). Classical studies state that the SLN innervates the cricothyroid muscle and provides sensory innervation to the supraglottic cavity, whereas the RLN supplies motor innervation to the remaining intrinsic laryngeal muscles and sensory innervation to the infraglottic cavity, but recent data suggest a more complex anatomical and functional organisation. The current neuroanatomical tracing study was undertaken to provide a comprehensive description of the central brainstem connections of the axons within the SLN and the RLN, including those neurons that innervate the larynx. The study has been carried out in 41 adult male Sprague-Dawley rats. The central projections of the laryngeal nerves were labelled following application of biotinylated dextran amines onto the SLN, the RLN or both. The most remarkable result of the study is that in the rat the RLN does not contain any afferent axons from the larynx, in contrast to the pattern observed in many other species including man. The RLN supplied only special visceromotor innervation to the intrinsic muscles of the larynx from motoneurons in the nucleus ambiguus (Amb). All the afferent axons innervating the larynx are contained within the SLN, and reach the nucleus of the solitary tract. The SLN also contained secretomotor efferents originating from motoneurons in the dorsal motor nucleus of the vagus, and special visceral efferent fibres from the Amb. In conclusion, the present study shows that in the rat the innervation of the larynx differs in significant ways from that described in other species.