ArticleJournal of anatomy2024
Establishing a veterinary anatomy core syllabus through a modified Delphi process.
Article in Journal of anatomy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- General skills amidst the details: alternative learning objectives and a framework of competencies for human anatomy.Advances in physiology education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anatomy forms a key component of veterinary curricula, but, in the context of an evolving profession, curricula are adapting and changing accordingly. There is a lack of guidance for educators regarding the levels of anatomical knowledge required for a graduate to be considered safe or competent. A formal review of veterinary anatomy learning outcomes (LOs) is therefore timely to support curriculum development in this rapidly evolving field. This study aimed to create a set of LOs which reflect the recommended core requirements for a new graduate veterinarian. A consensus approach using a modified Delphi method was used. The Delphi panel consisted of 23 experienced and active veterinary anatomy educators from veterinary schools within the UK and Ireland. The process had four stages: (1) Research team review, pre-screening and modification of a list of existing LOs (adapted from the Core Regional Anatomy Syllabus) which then formed the initial set of outcomes sent for review; (2) Delphi Round 1; (3) Delphi Round 2; (4) Post-Delphi final screening and review. Qualitative data outlining the rationale for modification and rejection of LOs were analysed via content analysis. 167 LOs were initially presented to the Delphi panel in Round 1. 64 of those were accepted, 79 recommended for modification and 23 rejected. 122 LOs were presented to the Delphi panel in Round 2. Of these, 86 outcomes were accepted, 10 modified and 26 rejected. 160 LOs were ultimately accepted and form the Veterinary Anatomy Core Syllabus. Key themes arising from analysis include the removal of unnecessary detail and increased focus on the relevance of competencies required of a new veterinary graduate. The syllabus presented may be used by curriculum planners, teachers and students within veterinary education worldwide.
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.