ArticleCureus2024
Enhancing Imaging Anatomy Competency: Integrating Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Viewers Into the Anatomy Lab Experience.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionRadiologic interpretation is a skill necessary for all physicians to provide quality care for their patients. However, some medical students are not exposed to Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) imaging manipulation until their third year during clinical rotations. The objective of this study is to evaluate how medical students exposed to DICOM manipulation perform on identifying anatomical structures compared to students who were not exposed.
methodsThis was a cross-sectional cohort study with 19 medical student participants organized into a test and control group. The test group consisted of first-year students who had been exposed to a new imaging anatomy curriculum (n = 9). The control group consisted of second-year students who had not had this experience (n = 10). The outcomes measured included quiz performance, self-reported confidence levels, and eye-tracking data.
resultsStudents in the test group performed better on the quiz compared to students in the control group (p = 0.03). Confidence between the test and control groups was not significantly different (p = 0.16), though a moderate to large effect size difference was noted (Hedges' g = 0.75). Saccade peak velocity and fixation duration between the groups were not significantly different (p = 0.29, p = 0.77), though a moderate effect size improvement was noted in saccade peak velocity for the test group (Hedges' g = 0.49).
conclusionThe results from this study suggest that the early introduction of DICOM imaging into a medical school curriculum does impact students' performance when asked to identify anatomical structures on a standardized quiz.
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.