ArticleClinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.)2019
Sharing personal information about anatomical body donors: What first-year medical students want to know and how it affects emotional responses to dissection.
Article in Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impacts of body donor non-anonymization on students' educational and humanistic development: A systematic review.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Pooled it
- Trauma-informed bequeathed body donor meeting sessions: A guide for creating a supportive and humanistic anatomy laboratory.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Among educators who teach in the human anatomy laboratory, there has been lively debate about sharing information about anatomical donors. One consideration in this debate is concern about the emotional effect of personalizing donors on the students. The purpose of this study was to evaluate student responses to being exposed to donor information (DI). Three cohorts of first-year medical students (n = 284) were surveyed at four time points throughout the year. Surveys queried students about positive and negative responses to working in the laboratory, wanting to know specific DI, and if knowing this DI would/did affect their responses to working with donors. Analyses examined the relationships between desire to know DI and indices of the following: positive response index (PRI), negative response index (NRI), avoid-approach index (AAI), and compassion-respect index. Across all surveys, a majority of respondents wanted to know some form of DI. At all time points, a majority of respondents felt that knowing all types of DI would increase their positive responses to working with donors. A greater PRI and AAI tended to be associated with wanting to know more personal DI (e.g., names and personal histories). A greater NRI tended to be associated with anticipating that learning personal DI would increase their negative responses before entering the laboratory, which did not persist after dissection began. These data suggest that for a majority of students, knowing personal DI increases their positive response and does not elicit negative responses to dissection or working with anatomical donors. Clin. Anat. 32:1019-1032, 2019. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.