Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35969356›Full record

SynthesisClinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.)2023

Achievement of learning outcomes in non-traditional (online) versus traditional (face-to-face) anatomy teaching in medical schools: A mixed method systematic review.

Hana M Abualadas, Lu Xu

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. King Aorta: Narrative anatomy education.Anatomical sciences education · 2025
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Impact of Clinical Video Scenarios Used for a Summative Exam to Facilitate Learning.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hana M AbualadasDepartment of Structural and Cellular Biology, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8025-0226
Lu XuDepartment of Structural and Cellular Biology, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Tulane University · USUniversity of Vermont · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the logistical challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic have prompted medical educators teaching gross anatomy to explore an expanded use of online instructional modalities. There is concern that this shift to online anatomy education in medical schools could affect long-term learning outcomes for future healthcare providers. In this systematic review, the educational effectiveness of online anatomy teaching is compared with traditional ("face-to-face") teaching methods, specifically in terms of students' academic performance and satisfaction. A search of four databases identified and screened 162 studies. Subsequently, 31 studies were analyzed, including both (a) teaching outcome measures (test scores) and (b) student satisfaction ratings. Authors chose studies, extracted data, assessed quality and examined risk of bias. Nineteen studies compared students' academic performances between online and face-to-face teaching methods. Twenty-six studies measured students' levels of satisfaction in both teaching methods. Both qualitative and quantitative analyses of the data revealed comparable academic performances with no statistical difference between the two teaching methods, but a higher level of satisfaction with face-to-face teaching. The findings confirm that students can learn from online teaching but are more satisfied with face-to-face teaching. The authors conclude that online teaching cannot replace traditional teaching and there is no preference for one type of modality over the other. Therefore, a multi-modal learning approach combining online with face-to-face educational modalities for medical students could be efficient and successful.

Indexed as

AnatomyCOVID-19Students, MedicalEducational MeasurementHumansPandemicsSchools, MedicalTeachingacademic performanceanatomy educationanatomy laboratoriescadaveric dissectionCovid-19distance learninge-learninggross anatomylearning outcomemedical educationmedical schoolmedical studentonline teachingstudent satisfactiontest scoretraditional face-to-face teaching

Identifiers

PMID35969356
PMCPMC10087909
OpenAlexW4291582935

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.