ArticleBMC medical education2024
Fostering engagement in virtual anatomy learning for healthcare students.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adoption and Integration of "Complete Anatomy" in Early-Year Medical Education: Student and Staff Perspectives.Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- A global overview of anatomical science education and its present and future role in biomedical curricula.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Review
- Virtual reality vs. Manikin based training on emergency life saving basic rescue skills: a summative evaluation.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Effects of Technology-Enhanced Learning on Student Engagement in Basic Medical Education: A Systematic Review.Medical science educator · 2025Review
- From Cadavers to Codes: The Evolution of Anatomy Education Through Digital Technologies.Medical science educator · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of virtual learning platforms is on the rise internationally, however, successful integration into existing curricula is a complex undertaking fraught with unintended consequences. Looking beyond medical and pedagogic literature can provide insight into factors affecting the user experience. The technology acceptance model, widely used in software evaluation, can be used to identify barriers and enablers of engagement with virtual learning platforms. Here, the technology acceptance model was used to scaffold the exploration of the factors that influenced students' perceptions of the virtual anatomy platform, Anatomage and how these shaped their intention to use it.
methodsFocus groups identified factors influencing students use of the Anatomage tables. Interventions were rolled out to address these findings, then further focus groups and the technology acceptance model identified how factors including self-efficacy, enjoyment, and social norms influenced students' intention to use the Anatomage table in the future.
resultsStudents raised significant concerns about understanding how to use the Anatomage table. Moreover, students who considered themselves to be poor at using technology perceived the Anatomage table as more complicated to use. The subjective norm of the group significantly altered the perceived ease of use and usefulness of the Anatomage. However, enjoyment had the greatest impact in influencing both perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Indicating that enjoyment is the largest contributing factor in altering technology engagement in healthcare cohorts and has the biggest potential to be manipulated to promote engagement.
conclusionsFocus groups used in tandem with the technology acceptance model provide an effective way to understand student perceptions around technology used in the healthcare curricula. This research determined interventions that promote student engagement with virtual learning platforms, which are important in supporting all healthcare programmes that incorporate technology enhanced learning.
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.