Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34995414›Full record

ArticleAnatomical sciences education2022

The question of dissection in medical training: Not just "if," but "when"? A student perspective.

Alexandra L Webb, Lillian Smyth, Mustafa Hafiz, Krisztina Valter

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anatomical sciences education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Alexandra L WebbMedical School, College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5571-5754
Lillian SmythMedical School, College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Mustafa HafizGP Synergy, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Krisztina ValterMedical School, College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Australian National University · AUMoscow University «Synergy» · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While debate about the use of-and alternatives to-human cadaveric dissection in medical training is robust, little attention has been paid to questions about timing. This study explores the perspectives of medical students and recent graduates with regard to two key questions: when in the degree program do students prefer dissection opportunities and what are the students getting out of participating in dissection? Self-report survey data from students in preclinical years (n = 105), clinical years (n = 57), and graduates (n = 13) were analyzed. Most (89%) preferred dissection during the preclinical years, with no effect by training year (χ

Indexed as

AnatomyEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalCadaverCurriculumHumansSurveys and Questionnairescurriculumdissectiongross anatomy educationmedical educationstudent perspective

Identifiers

PMID34995414
PMCPMC9306682
OpenAlexW4206828302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.