ArticleSAGE open nursing
Learning Outcomes of Nursing Students' Experience With Cadaveric Dissection: A Scoping Review.
Article in SAGE open nursing. 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.
- "A lot of it is about feel": The promise of sensory ethnography for anatomical education research.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Review
- Unveiling the perceptions of medical and allied health students towards cadaveric dissection and virtual resources in anatomy education: a cross sectional study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Cadaver Anatomy Soft Skills Scale (CASSS): Design and preliminary validation of a tool to assess student perceptions of the impact of cadaveric anatomy instruction on soft skills for future healthcare workers.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Institutional Determinants of Academic Achievement in Biomedical Sciences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Nursing Students in Uganda.Advances in medical education and practice · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cadaver dissection in anatomy, a cornerstone of medical school education, has been replaced by digital technologies. This study aimed to determine the learning outcomes nursing students could achieve through cadaveric dissection practice (CDP). Methods: This scoping review was carried out using the checklist outlined in the Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews through August 2023. Articles from PubMed, ERIC, and CINAL were included. This scoping review included studies that focused on the learning effects of nursing students' experiences with cadaver dissection, written in English, and covered all study types. Results: The cadaveric dissection exercise resulted in a strong interest in the human body and a thorough understanding of anatomy and physiology. It also allows for creating an image of care for the patient before death, the meaning of existence after death, acceptance that death is not frightening, and an understanding of the afterlife. Furthermore, the cadaveric dissection exercise has been reported to improve confidence in patient care, lead to a better understanding of what other professions practice, and involve the development of professional identity. Conclusions: Studies on the learning effects of CDP have differed in subject matter and educational methodologies. In the future, while determining how the experience of CDP is related to nursing practice of nursing students and graduates, we must explore effective CDP and develop educational methodologies that can achieve similar learning effects.
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.