2005
DOI: 10.1002/ar.b.20053
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effectiveness of using cross-sections in the recognition of anatomical structures in radiological images

Abstract: This study measured the effect of using anatomical cross-sections to enhance the interpretation of radiological images. It examined the effectiveness of using magnetic resonance (MR or MRI) images presented side-by-side with their corresponding cross-sectional images, as compared to using only the MR images. Student aptitude to identify anatomical structures in the radiological images was measured. The study also assessed student preferences toward the two presentation formats. Thirty-four freshmen medical stu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
(6 reference statements)
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the results of this study showed no improvement in the retention of anatomical information on radiological images. Similar results were obtained, which compared the presentation of radiological images with corresponding crosssections to radiological images alone (Khalil et al, 2005a). A study by Barros et al (2001) indicated that teaching sectional anatomy with plastinated slices improved the interpretation of CT sections.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…However, the results of this study showed no improvement in the retention of anatomical information on radiological images. Similar results were obtained, which compared the presentation of radiological images with corresponding crosssections to radiological images alone (Khalil et al, 2005a). A study by Barros et al (2001) indicated that teaching sectional anatomy with plastinated slices improved the interpretation of CT sections.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…These studies demonstrate that students' abilities to identify anatomical structures in radiological images improve when instructed using the same images or modalities. Conversely, Khalil et al (2005) found that there was no difference in the ability of students who were exposed to both cross sections and MR images and students only exposed to MR images to identify anatomical structures in radiological images. It is unclear whether students' understanding of anatomy and anatomical spatial relationships improves when they view specimens or images that are different from those used for the initial instruction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…In other words, only students familiar with regional anatomy from cadaver dissection can understand sectional anatomy. Acquisition of knowledge of sectional anatomy also enables students to review macroscopic anatomy and prepares them for the interpretation of CTs and MRIs in future clinical training (Khalil et al, 2005(Khalil et al, , 2008. In a sectional anatomy class, numerous structures are difficult to present.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The inclusion of sectional anatomy training in medical school curricula has been shown to have a great impact on subsequent CT interpretation (de Barros et al, 2001). In another study, students showed strong preferences for the presentation of sections with their corresponding MRIs, because it helped the students interpret the MRIs (de Barros et al, 2001;Khalil et al, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%