Are we teaching sufficient anatomy at medical school? The opinions of newly qualified doctors

Clinical Anatomy

Volumn 21, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 718-724

  Fitzgerald, J E F ^a,b   White, M J ^a   Tang, S W ^b   Maxwell Armstrong, C A ^b   James, D K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b QUEEN S MEDICAL CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Academic performance; Clinical practice; Human anatomy; Medical careers; Medical education; Teaching; Tomorrow's doctor

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CAREER; COMPARATIVE ANATOMY; DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL SCHOOL; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ANATOMY; CAREER CHOICE; CLINICAL MEDICINE; CURRICULUM; DATA COLLECTION; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, GRADUATE; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, UNDERGRADUATE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS;

EID: 54849403523     PISSN: 08973806     EISSN: 10982353     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ca.20662     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Azer SA, Eizenberg N. 2007. Do we need dissection in an integrated problem-based learning medical course? Perceptions of first- and second-year students. Surg Radiol Anat 29:173-180.
2. 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.
3. Dangerfield P, Bradley P, Gibbs T. 2000. Learning gross anatomy in a clinical skills course. Clin Anat 13:444-447.
4. Department of Health. 1997. Planning the Medical Workforce. Medical Workforce Standing Advisory Committee: Third Report, December 1997. London: Department of Health.
5. Department of Health. 2003. Modernising Medical Careers. The Response of Four UK Health Ministers to the Consultation on Unfinished Business: Proposals for Reform of the Senior House Officer Grade. London: Department of Health.
6. Drake RL, Lowrie DJ Jr, Prewitt CM. 2002. Survey of gross anatomy, microscopic anatomy, neuroscience, and embryology courses in medical school curricula in the United States. Anat Rec 269:118-122.
7. Evans DJ, Watt DJ. 2005. Provision of anatomical teaching in a new British medical school: getting the mix right. Anat Rec B New Anat 284:22-27.
8. General Medical Council. 1993. Tomorrow's Doctors. Recommendations on Undergraduate Medical Education. London: General Medical Council.
9. Heylings DJA. 2002. Anatomy 1999-2000: the curriculum, who teaches it and how? Med Educ 36:702-710.
10. Holla SJ, Selvaraj KG, Isaac B, Chandi G. 1999. Significance of the role of self-study and group discussion. Clin Anat 12:277-280.
11. Jones DG, Dias GJ, Mercer S, Zhang M, Nicholson HD. 2002. Clinical anatomy research in a research-driven anatomy department. Clin Anat 15:228-232.
12. Lempp HK. 2005. Perceptions of dissection by students in one medical school: beyond learning about anatomy. A qualitative study. Med Educ 39:318-325.
13. Leong SK. 1999. Back to basics. Clin Anat 12:422-426.
14. Lockwood AM, Roberts AM. 2007. The anatomy demonstrator of the future: an examination of the role of the medically-qualified anatomy demonstrator in the context of tomorrow's doctors and modernizing medical careers. Clin Anat 20:455-459.
15. McHanwell S, Davies DC, Morris J, Parkin I, Whiten S, Atkinson M, Dyball R, Ockleford C, Standring S, Wilton J. 2007. A core syllabus in anatomy for medical students - Adding common sense to need to know. Eur J Anat 11 (Suppl 1):3-18.
16. McKeown PP, Heylings DJ, Stevenson M, McKelvey KJ, Nixon JR, McCluskey DR. 2003. The impact of curricular change on medical students' knowledge of anatomy. Med Educ 37:954-961.
17. McLachlan JC. 2004. New path for teaching anatomy: living anatomy and medical imaging vs. dissection. Anat Rec B New Anat 281:4-5.
18. Moxham BJ, Plaisant O. 2007. Perception of medical students towards the clinical relevance of anatomy. Clin Anat 20:560-564.
19. Older J. 2004. Anatomy: a must for teaching the next generation. Surgeon J R Coll Surg Edinb Irel 2:79-90.
20. Pabst R, Rothkötter HJ. 1997. Retrospective evaluation of undergraduate medical education by doctors at the end of their residency time in hospitals: consequences for the anatomical curriculum. Anat Rec 249:431-434.
21. Patel KM, Moxham BJ. 2006. Attitudes of professional anatomists to curricular change. Clin Anat 19:132-141.
22. Plaisant O, Cabanis EA, Delmas V. 2004. Going back to dissection in a medical curriculum: The paradigm of Necker-Enfants Malades. Surg Radiol Anat 26:504-511.
23. Prince KJ, Scherpbier AJ, Van Mameren H, Drukker J, van der Vleuten CP. 2005. Do students have sufficient knowledge of clinical anatomy? Med Educ 39:326-332.
24. Raftery AT. 2006. Anatomy teaching in the UK. Surgery 25:1-2.
25. Snelling J, Sahai A, Ellis H. 2003. Attitudes of medical and dental students to dissection. Clin Anat 16:165-172.
26. Spielmann PM, Oliver CW. 2005. The carpal bones: a basic test of medical students' and junior doctors' knowledge of anatomy. Surgeon 3:257-259.
27. Turney BW. 2007. Anatomy in a modern medical curriculum. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 89:104-107.
28. Waterston SW, Stewart IJ. 2005. Survey of clinicians' attitudes to the anatomical teaching and knowledge of medical students. Clin Anat 18:380-384.
29. Willan PL, Humpherson JR. 1999. Profiles of applicants for junior faculty posts to teach anatomy in the UK: changing populations of candidates. Clin Anat 12:272-276.