ArticleCureus2024
Barriers in Body Donations for Anatomy Teaching: Lessons Learned From Students and Donors.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Dissection in the 21BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Enhancing behavioral intentions toward body donation through a theory of planned behavior-based, culturally tailored educational intervention: a quasi-experimental study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- A structured evaluation of LLM-generated step-by-step instructions in cadaveric brachial plexus dissection.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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Cadaveric dissection has remained the mainstay of anatomy teaching. However, there is an acute shortage of cadavers for teaching undergraduate students, postgraduates, and specialists, and to supplement the gap, voluntary body donation is gaining momentum. The present study aims to explore the barriers to body donations for anatomical dissection. Methods A descriptive study was undertaken among medical students and registered voluntary body donors at a medical college in the Upper Assam region of India from January 2024 to March 2024. Results The majority of the first-year MBBS medical students (129 out of 161; 80.1%) were found to be not willing to donate their bodies for anatomical dissection. There was no statistically significant difference in the age, gender, and religion of the participants. The primary reasons for students' reluctance to donate were emotional attachments to themselves, their family members, their religion, and their preferences on social customs for the disposal of the dead. Among the registered voluntary body donors, the most common source of information for the body donation program was an awareness program conducted by NGOs involved in the promotion of body donation. Altruism was the most common motivation for getting registered for body donation. Provision of cadavers for research and training was the most common reason for registration for donation, whereas lack of information was the most common barrier. All the participants wanted due respect for the donated bodies from the doctors, students, and staff during handling. Conclusion The mere possession of knowledge regarding body donation does not increase participation in the actual process. Personal beliefs, repeated motivations by voluntary organizations and registered donors, proper utilization of the bodies, and setting examples in ethical handling of the donated bodies in the dissection hall may greatly improve the body donation program.
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.