Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: A review of the evidence

Medical Education

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 15-22

  Winkelmann, Andreas ^a,b  

^a Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin ^*  (Germany)

^b CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Anatomy *education; Dissection *education; Education, medical, undergraduate *methods; Review publication type ; Teaching *methods

Indexed keywords

ANATOMY; AUTOMATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL SCHOOL; MEDICAL STUDENT; REVIEW; STANDARDIZATION; TEACHING;

ANATOMY; CADAVER; COGNITION; DISSECTION; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, UNDERGRADUATE; HUMANS; STUDENTS, MEDICAL; TEACHING;

EID: 33845769917     PISSN: 03080110     EISSN: 13652923     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02625.x     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. Gartner LP. Anatomical sciences in the allopathic medical school curriculum in the United States between 1967 and 2001. Clin Anat 2003;16:434-9.
2. McLachlan JC. New path for teaching anatomy: living anatomy and medical imaging versus dissection. Anat Rec (New Anat) 2004;281:4-5.
3. McLachlan JC, Bligh J, Bradley P, Searle J. Teaching anatomy without cadavers. Med Educ 2004;38:418-24.
4. Amadio PC. Reaffirming the importance of dissection. Clin Anat 1996;9:136-7.
5. Jones DG. Reassessing the importance of dissection: a critique and elaboration. Clin Anat 1997;10:123-7.
6. Aziz AA, McKenzie JC, Wilson JS, Cowie RJ, Ayeni SA, Dunn BK. The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics. Anat Rec (New Anat) 2002;269:20-32.
7. Older J. Anatomy: a must for teaching in the next generation. Surgeon 2004;2:79-90.
8. Granger NA. Dissection laboratory is vital to medical gross anatomy education. Anat Rec (New Anat) 2004;281:6-8.
9. Parker L. Anatomical dissection: why are we cutting it out? Dissection in undergraduate teaching. ANZ J Surg 2002;72:910-2.
10. Mutyala S, Cahill D. Catching up. Clin Anat 1996;9:53-6.
11. Hanna SJ, Freeston JE. Importance of anatomy and dissection: the junior doctor's viewpoint. Clin Anat 2002;15:377-8.
12. Bogduk N. Art macabre: is anatomy necessary? [Letter.] ANZ J Surg 2001;71:782.
13. Zirkel JB, Zirkel PA. Technological alternatives to actual dissection in anatomy instruction: a review of the research. Educ Technol 1997;37:52-6.
14. Warnick BR. Cadaver dissection and the limits of simulation. J Clin Ethics 2004;15:350-62.
15. Lella JW, Pawluch D. Medical students and the cadaver in social and cultural context. In: Lock M, Gordon DR, eds. Biomedicine Examined. Dordrecht: Kluwer 1988;125-53.
16. Sinclair DC. An experiment in the teaching of anatomy. J Med Educ 1965;40:401-13.
17. Bernard GR. Prosection demonstrations as substitutes for the conventional human gross anatomy laboratory. J Anat 1972;47:724-8.
18. Willson JT, Tarby TJ, Seale RU, Whitlock DG. The two-course system in gross anatomy. J Med Educ 1975;50:788-96.
19. Jones NA, Olafson RP, Sutin J. Evaluation of a gross anatomy programme without dissection. Acad Med 1978;53:198-205.
20. Peppler RD, Hougland MW, Kwasigroch TE, Skalko RG. Medical gross anatomy course: simultaneous teaching of the upper and lower extremity. J Med Educ 1980;55:794-6.
21. Peppler RD, Kwasigroch TE, Hougland MW. Evaluation of simultaneous teaching of extremities in a gross anatomy programme. Acad Med 1985;60:635-9.
22. Nnodim JO. Learning human anatomy: by dissection or from prosections? Med Educ 1990;24:389-95.
23. Stanford W, Erkonen WE, Casselli MD, Moran BD, Easley G, Carris RL, Albanese MA. Evaluation of a computer-based programme for teaching cardiac anatomy. Invest Radiol 1994;29:248-52.
24. Yeager VL. Learning gross anatomy: dissection and prosection. Clin Anat 1996;9:57-9.
25. Nnodim JO. A controlled trial of peer-teaching in practical gross anatomy. Clin Anat 1997;10:112-7.
26. Sandra A, Ferguson KJ. Analysis of gross anatomy laboratory performance using a student dissection/presentation teaching method. Teach Learn Med 1998;10:158-61.
27. Jones LS, Paulman LE, Thadani R, Terracio L. Medical student dissection of cadavers improves performance on practical exams but not on the NBME anatomy subject exam. Med Educ Online [serial online] 2001;6:2. Available from: http://www.med-ed-online.org.
28. Johnson JH. Importance of dissection in learning anatomy: personal dissection versus peer teaching. Clin Anat 2002;15:38-44.
29. McWhorter DL, Forester JP. Effects of an alternate dissection schedule on gross anatomy laboratory practical performance. Clin Anat 2004;17:144-8.
30. Colliver JA. Call for greater emphasis on effect-size measures in published articles in Teaching and Learning in Medicine. Teach Learn Med 2002;14:206-10.
31. Norman GR, Schmidt HG. Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: theory, practice and paper darts. Med Educ 2000;34:721-8.
32. Downing SM. Validity: on the meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Med Educ 2003;37:830-7.
33. Downing SM. Reliability: on the reproducibility of assessment data. Med Educ 2004;38:1006-12.
34. Griffioen FM, Drukker J, Hoogland PV, Godschalk M. General plan anatomy. Objectives of the teaching of anatomy/embryology in medical curricula in the Netherlands. Eur J Morph 1999;37:288-325.
35. Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CP. Different written assessment methods: what can be said about their strengths and weaknesses? Med Educ 2004;38:974-9.
36. ten Cate O. What happens to the student? The neglected variable in educational outcome research. Adv Health Sci Educ 2001;6:81-8.
37. Albanese M. Problem-based learning: why curricula are likely to show little effect on knowledge and clinical skills. Med Educ 2000;34:729-38.
38. Colliver JA. Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula. Acad Med 2000;75:259-66.
39. Farrow R. The effectiveness of PBL: the debate continues. Is meta-analysis helpful? Med Educ 2003;37:1131-2.
40. van der Vleuten CP, Dolmans DH, Scherpbier AJ. The need for evidence in education. Med Teach 2000;22:246-50.
41. Garg AX, Norman GR, Eva KW, Spero L, Sharan S. Is there any real virtue of virtual reality? The minor role of multiple orientations in learning anatomy from computers. Acad Med 2002;77 (Suppl):97-9.