ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
What Faculty and Students Value When Evaluating Human Digital Anatomy Platforms: A Mixed-Methods Study.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of glasses-free 3D anatomy learning materials through a randomized control study with a puzzle-like method.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Trial
- Augmented reality for teaching undergraduate human anatomy: An educators' perspective.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Article
- Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThere is an increasing availability of digital technologies for teaching and learning of human anatomy. Studies have shown that such applications allow for better spatial awareness than traditional methods. These digital human anatomy platforms offer users myriad features, such as the ability to manipulate 3D models, conduct prosection, investigate anatomical regions through virtual reality, or perform knowledge tests on themselves. This study examined what faculty members' value when using digital human anatomy platforms for teaching and what students value when using these platforms for learning.
methodsSix anatomy faculty members and 21 students were selected to participate in this study. After using the three digital anatomy platforms for at least 1 week, a survey was conducted to record their feedback in 4 categories: usability, interactive features, level of detail, and learning support. Respondents' Qualitative feedback within each category was also analyzed to strengthen the study's findings.
resultsThe study's findings showed that faculty members and students have different priorities when evaluating digital anatomy platforms. Faculty members valued platforms that provided better accuracy and detailed anatomical structures, while students prioritized usability above the rest of the features.
conclusionGiven that faculty and students have different preferences when selecting digital anatomy platforms, this article proposed that educators maximize the specific affordances offered by the technology by having a clear pedagogy and strategy on how the technology will be incorporated into the curriculum to help students achieve the desired learning outcomes.
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.