Effects of an Alternate Dissection Schedule on Gross Anatomy Laboratory Practical Performance

Clinical Anatomy

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 144-148

  McWhorter, David L ^a,b   Forester, Joseph P ^a  

^a University of Medicine and Biosciences College of Osteopathic Medicine   (United States)

^b UHS COM   (United States)

Author keywords

Basic science courses; Education; Lower limb; Medical curriculum; Upper limb

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARM; ARTICLE; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CURRICULUM; DISSECTION; EDUCATION PROGRAM; FUNCTIONAL ANATOMY; HUMAN; LABORATORY; LEG; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL SCHOOL; NORMAL HUMAN; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANK SUM TEST; SCORING SYSTEM; TEACHING; TECHNIQUE;

ANATOMY; ARM; CURRICULUM; DISSECTION; EDUCATION, MEDICAL; HUMANS; LEG;

EID: 1542618596     PISSN: 08973806     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ca.10228     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Amadio PC. 1996. Reaffirming the importance of dissection. Clin Anat 9:136-137.
2. Aziz MA, McKenzie JC, Wilson JS, Cowie RJ, Ayeni SA, Dunn BK. 2002. The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics. Anat Rec 269:20-32.
3. Blue AV, Garr D, Del Bene V, McCurdy L. 2000. Curricular renewal for the new millennium at the Medical University of South Carolina College of Medicine. J S C Med Assoc 96:22-27.
4. Cottam WW. 1999. Adequacy of medical school gross anatomy education as perceived by certain postgraduate residency programs and anatomy course directors. Clin Anat 12:55-65.
5. Drake RL. 1998. Anatomy education in a changing medical curriculum. Anat Rec 253:28-31.
6. Forester JP, McWhorter DL, Cole MS. 2002. The relationship between premedical coursework in gross anatomy and histology and medical school performance in gross anatomy and histology. Clin Anat 15:160-164.
7. Hendleman WJ, Boss M. 1986. Reciprocal peer teaching by medical students in the gross anatomy laboratory. J Med Educ 61:674-680.
8. Johnson JH. 2002. Importance of dissection in learning anatomy: personal dissection versus peer teaching. Clin Anat 15:38-44.
9. Jones DG. 1997. Reassessing the importance of dissection: a critique and elaboration. Clin Anat 10:123-127.
10. Mandin H, Harasym P, Eagle C, Watanabe M. 1995. Developing a "clinical presentation" curriculum at the University of Calgary. Acad Med 70:186-193.
11. Nnodim JO. 1990. Learning human anatomy: by dissection or from prosections? Med Educ 24:389-395.
12. Nnodim JO, Ohanaka EC, Osuji CU. 1996. A follow-up comparative study of two modes of learning human anatomy: by dissection and from prosections. Clin Anat 9:258-262.
13. Nnodim JO. 1997. A controlled trial of peer-teaching in practical gross anatomy. Clin Anat 10:112-117.
14. Vidic B, Weitlauf HM. 2002. Horizontal and vertical integration of academic disciplines in the medical school curriculum. Clin Anat 15:233-235.
15. Woloschuk W, Harasym P, Mandin H, Jones A. 2000. Use of scheme-based problem solving: an evaluation of the implementation and utilization of schemes in a clinical presentation curriculum, Med Educ 34:437-442.