ArticleCureus2024
Perception of First-Year MBBS Students Toward Virtual Dissection in Learning Anatomy: A Comparative Study Between High and Low Academic Achievers.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perspectives of Surgical Branch Residents on Anatomy Education and Its Importance.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2026Article
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
Introduction Anatomy, as a crucial subject in the medical curriculum, demands continuous efforts to adopt innovative teaching methods to make it a student-friendly subject. One of the new educational technologies is the virtual anatomy dissection. This high-tech tool allows students to perform some hands-on manipulation of a digital cadaver through an electronic screen in the form of a table. The objectives of the study are to determine the perceptions of first-year MBBS students toward virtual anatomy dissection and to compare the responses of high and low academic achievers. Methodology This cross-sectional study was carried out at AIIMS, Guwahati, India, with the approval of the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC). A validated questionnaire was distributed via Google Forms to 99 students in June 2024. The study used a questionnaire of 20 closed-ended items with a five-point Likert scale and 15 open-ended items to collect data on students' perceptions toward virtual dissection effectiveness, engagement and interactivity, accessibility, technical usability, learning outcomes, and comparison with traditional dissection. Independent t-test was done to identify statistically significant differences between the responses of high and low academic achievers. Results Out of 99 students, 89 (89.89%) responded. Most of the students agreed that virtual dissection is an effective tool for better understanding lectures (65, 73.03%), providing motivation to study (55, 61.79%), making learning a continuous process (57, 64.04%), facilitating deep learning (70, 78.65%), systematic knowledge gain (52, 58.42%), better memorization (72, 80.89%), improved academic performance (63, 70.78%), and reducing anxiety in learning anatomy (42, 47.19%). Sixty-seven (75.28%) stated that virtual dissection should only be a supplement to cadaver dissection for learning Anatomy. Among 20 items (closed-ended questions), only six items showed a statistically significant difference between high and low academic achievers. Conclusion The positive feedback from students presents a sound argument that justifies its incorporation into the anatomy curriculum as a supplement for cadaveric dissection.
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.