Comparison of traditional methods with 3D computer models in the instruction of hepatobiliary anatomy

Anatomical Sciences Education

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 84-91

  Keedy, Alexander W ^a   Durack, Jeremy C ^a   Sandhu, Parmbir ^b   Chen, Eric M ^c   O'Sullivan, Patricia S ^a   Breiman, Richard S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

3D imaging techniques; Anatomic imaging; Anatomical sciences medical education; Anatomy and medical education; Computers in anatomical education

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANATOMY; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HEPATOBILIARY SYSTEM; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; LIVER; MALE; MEDICAL STUDENT; METHODOLOGY; RANDOMIZATION; TEACHING; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ADULT; ANATOMY; BILIARY TRACT; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; LIVER; MALE; RANDOM ALLOCATION; STUDENTS, MEDICAL; TEACHING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79952840022     PISSN: 19359772     EISSN: 19359780     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ase.212     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Adler MD, Johnson KB. 2000. Quantifying the literature of computer-aided instruction in medical education. Acad Med 75: 1025-1028.
2. Beermann J, Tetzlaff R, Bruckner T, Schoebinger M, Muller-Stich BP, Gutt CN, Meinzer HP, Kadmon M, Fischer L. 2010. Three-dimensional visualisation improves understanding of surgical liver anatomy. Med Educ 44: 936-940.
3. Beranova E, Sykes C. 2007. A systematic review of computer-based softwares for educating patients with coronary heart disease. Patient Educ Couns 66: 21-28.
4. Cook DA. 2005. The research we still are not doing: An agenda for the study of computer-based learning. Acad Med 80: 541-548.
5. de Barros N, Rodrigues CJ, Rodrigues AJJr, de Negri Germano MA, Cerri GG. 2001. The value of teaching sectional anatomy to improve CT scan interpretation. Clin Anat 14: 36-41.
6. Estevez ME, Lindgren KA, Bergethon PR. 2010. A novel three-dimensional tool for teaching human neuroanatomy. Anat Sci Educ 3: 309-317.
7. Friedl R, Hoppler H, Ecard K, Scholz W, Hannekum A, Ochsner W, Stracke S. 2006. Multimedia-driven teaching significantly improves students' performance when compared with a print medium. Ann Thorac Surg 81: 1760-1766.
8. Garg AX, Norman G, Sperotable L. 2001. How medical students learn spatial anatomy. Lancet 357: 363-364.
9. Garg AX, Norman GR, Eva KW, Spero L, Sharan S. 2002. Is there any real virtue of virtual reality?: The minor role of multiple orientations in learning anatomy from computers. Acad Med 77: S97-S99.
10. Hallgren RC, Parkhurst PE, Monson CL, Crewe NM. 2002. An interactive, web-based tool for learning anatomic landmarks. Acad Med 77: 263-265.
11. Hariri S, Rawn C, Srivastava S, Youngblood P, Ladd A. 2004. Evaluation of a surgical simulator for learning clinical anatomy. Med Educ 38: 896-902.
12. Hegarty M, Sims VK. 1994. Individual differences in mental animation during mechanical reasoning. Mem Cognit 22: 411-430.
13. Hisley KC, Anderson LD, Smith SE, Kavic SM, Tracy JK. 2008. Coupled physical and digital cadaver dissection followed by a visual test protocol provides insights into the nature of anatomical knowledge and its evaluation. Anat Sci Educ 1: 27-40.
14. Hudson JN. 2004. Computer-aided learning in the real world of medical education: Does the quality of interaction with the computer affect student learning? Med Educ 38: 887-895.
15. Huk T. 2006. Who benefits from learning with 3D models? The case of spatial ability. J Comput Assist Learn 22: 392-404.
16. Jurgaitis J, Paskonis M, Pivoriunas J, Martinaityte I, Juska A, Jurgaitiene R, Samuilis A, Volf I, Schobinger M, Schemmer P, Kraus TW, Strupas K. 2008. The comparison of 2-dimensional with 3-dimensional hepatic visualization in the clinical hepatic anatomy education. Medicina (Kaunas) 44: 428-438.
17. Langlois J, Wells GA, Lecourtois M, Bergeron G, Yetisir E, Martin M. 2009. Spatial abilities in an elective course of applied anatomy after a problem-based learning curriculum. Anat Sci Educ 2: 107-112.
18. Letterie GS. 2003. Medical education as a science: The quality of evidence for computer-assisted instruction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188: 849-853.
19. Levinson AJ, Weaver B, Garside S, McGinn H, Norman GR. 2007. Virtual reality and brain anatomy: A randomised trial of e-learning instructional designs. Med Educ 41: 495-501.
20. Levison DA. 2006. How not to learn and how to learn as a medical student. Med Teach 28: 209.
21. Lufler RS, Zumwalt AC, Romney CA, Hoagland TM. 2010. Incorporating radiology into medical gross anatomy: Does the use of cadaver CT scans improve students' academic performance in anatomy? Anat Sci Educ 3: 56-63.
22. Mayer RE, Hegarty M, Mayer S, Campbell J. 2005. When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. J Exp Psychol Appl 11: 256-265.
23. McNulty JA, Halama J, Espiritu B. 2004. Evaluation of computer-aided instruction in the medical gross anatomy curriculum. Clin Anat 17: 73-78.
24. McNulty JA, Sonntag B, Sinacore JM. 2009. Evaluation of computer-aided instruction in a gross anatomy course: A six-year study. Anat Sci Educ 2: 2-8.
25. Miles KA. 2005. Diagnostic imaging in undergraduate medical education: An expanding role. Clin Radiol 60: 742-745.
26. Nicholson DT, Chalk C, Funnell WR, Daniel SJ. 2006. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model. Med Educ 40: 1081-1087.
27. Prinz A, Bolz M, Findl O. 2005. Advantage of three dimensional animated teaching over traditional surgical videos for teaching ophthalmic surgery: A randomised study. Br J Ophthalmol 89: 1495-1499.
28. Tam MD. 2010. Building virtual models by postprocessing radiology images: A guide for anatomy faculty. Anat Sci Educ 3: 261-266.
29. Tam MD, Hart AR, Williams S, Heylings D, Leinster S. 2009. Is learning anatomy facilitated by computer-aided learning? A review of the literature. Med Teach 31: e393-e396.
30. Trelease RB, Rosset A. 2008. Transforming clinical imaging data for virtual reality learning objects. Anat Sci Educ 1: 50-55.
31. Tversky B, Morrison JB, Betrancourt, M. 2002. Animation: Can it facilitate? Int J Hum Comput Stud 57: 247-262.
32. Vandenberg SG, Kuse AR. 1978. Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Percept Mot Skills 47: 599-604.