ArticleClinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.)2025
A comparison of 1- versus 3-month regional anatomy exposure on learning outcomes of undergraduate medical students.
Article in Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does gender influence learning, perceptions and retention in regional anatomy dissection courses?Anatomical science international · 2026Article
- A comparison of 1- versus 3-month regional anatomy exposure on learning outcomes of undergraduate medical students.Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Retention of gross and clinical anatomy knowledge among medical graduates in Sudan: a comparative study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regional anatomy teaching forms a cornerstone of undergraduate medical education. Owing to an increase in teaching and learning content throughout the medical curriculum in recent years, contact hours and overall course durations in anatomy are under review worldwide. This study aimed to assess whether shortening the course content duration impacts learning gain and the ability to identify anatomical structures correctly. Undergraduate medical students of the Johannes Kepler University Linz (JKU; n = 310) and at the Medical University of Graz (MUG; n = 156) participating in regional anatomy courses were included. Whole body regional anatomy courses, including hands-on dissection and accompanying lectures, were delivered over one or three months. Course content and examination mode were kept consistent, while the duration of knowledge delivery was one or three months, respectively. Objective structured practical examinations (OSPE) were then carried out on prosections for the neck, thorax, and abdomen. 3-month course exposure resulted in significantly higher OSPE scores for the neck (49 vs. 37%), thorax (65 vs. 54%), and abdomen (65 vs. 45%), respectively. Further evaluation of the utility of different embalming types yielded higher 3-month scores in the neck and thorax regions with Thiel-embalmed tissues and thorax and abdomen regions in ethanol-glycerin-embalmed tissues. Course exposure over a more extended period, like three months, appears to be highly beneficial.
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.