1992
DOI: 10.1097/00004424-199203000-00016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effectiveness of Teaching Radiologic Image Interpretation in Gross Anatomy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
75
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 81 publications
(76 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
75
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The most commonly reported methods to incorporate radiology with anatomy instruction include concurrent radiology lectures (Sullivan et al 1987;Squire 1989;Erkonen et al 1992), small group learning with (Forrester 1971) and without (Tegtmeyer et al 1974;Whitley 1977) formal instructors, and radiologic images of de-identified patients in the dissection laboratory (Squire et al 1975;Reidy et al 1978;Bassett & Squire 1985;Turmezei et al 2009). Others include problembased learning (Navsa et al 2004;Subramaniam et al 2004;Subramaniam 2006), ultrasound workshops using students and human models (Teichgraber et al 1996;Wittich et al 2002), and radiologic imaging of dissection laboratory cadavers (McNiesh et al 1983;Hisley et al 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most commonly reported methods to incorporate radiology with anatomy instruction include concurrent radiology lectures (Sullivan et al 1987;Squire 1989;Erkonen et al 1992), small group learning with (Forrester 1971) and without (Tegtmeyer et al 1974;Whitley 1977) formal instructors, and radiologic images of de-identified patients in the dissection laboratory (Squire et al 1975;Reidy et al 1978;Bassett & Squire 1985;Turmezei et al 2009). Others include problembased learning (Navsa et al 2004;Subramaniam et al 2004;Subramaniam 2006), ultrasound workshops using students and human models (Teichgraber et al 1996;Wittich et al 2002), and radiologic imaging of dissection laboratory cadavers (McNiesh et al 1983;Hisley et al 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As said by Schober et al, [32], "the transmission of information into long-term memory and the rapid recall in a clinical situation depend crucially on the conditions under which the information was learned". The above said statement was confirmed by a study by Erkonen WE et al, [33] where lectures were designed to integrate diagnostic imaging with anatomical structures. They found that when the students were followed up 14-17 months, 74% gave correct answers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…They found that when the students were followed up 14-17 months, 74% gave correct answers. They concluded stating that, "this high level of long-term retention documents the effectiveness of integrating diagnostic radiologic images into normal gross anatomy instruction" [33]. This could also be an example for level-appropriate teaching of the clinical reasoning process in human anatomy [34].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Teaching anatomy to undergraduate medical students using imaging modalities, has been found to have many benefits, including improving performance. 30 Testing and evaluating the neuroanatomical knowledge of the medical students was multimodal in both CU. However, in the Morpho CU there is no continuous assessment; evaluation takes place only at the end of the CU.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%