Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38254392›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Plastinate Library: A Tool to Support Veterinary Anatomy Learning.

Rafael Senos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Anatomic Interactive Atlas of the Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    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

1 author.

Rafael SenosDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, 240 Farrier Road, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The shortage of both time for anatomy courses in the new veterinary medicine curriculum and instructors prepared to teach biomedical sciences has raised a crisis in anatomical education. Often, students spend time out of their classes trying to learn not only concepts but also laboratory-wise content from 2D materials such as books and videos. In addition, since the global COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, studying and habits have been reviewed, with many people adopting an at-home style. The purpose of this study was to evaluate students' acceptance of taking plastinate anatomical specimens to study at home. Thirty-three students were divided into three groups. G1 took home a set of kidneys composed of equine, bovine, and swine materials; G2 took home a pig kidney; and G3 (control) did not take any plastinate specimen home. Acceptance was assessed using an anonymous survey and interview. The method had high acceptance by the students, who believed that having the plastinate library was advantageous from different perspectives, including aiding with learning the differences between kidneys from different species, time flexibility, no commute to study after hours of laboratory classes, and time redistribution to prioritize the laboratory topics. The plastinate library has the potential to be a supportive tool for anatomy students in the contemporaneous veterinary curriculum paradigm, considering that the G1 and G2 groups used the plastinate specimens at home to complement the time they spent in the laboratory.

Indexed as

animaleducationmorphologyplastinationremoteteaching

Identifiers

PMID38254392
PMCPMC10812824

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.