ArticleAnatomical sciences education2025
A limited global perspective on what makes anatomical public engagement good or bad.
Article in Anatomical sciences education, 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.
- A limited global perspective on what makes anatomical public engagement good or bad.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
- Exploring the relationship between entertainment and education in anatomy public engagement: A qualitative examination of anatomists' perspectives.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
- Anatomy engagement and science communication.Anatomical sciences 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
Abstract
Anatomical public engagement has the potential to enhance anatomical literacy and patient-provider communication. However, the lack of consensus on effective practices, ethical considerations, and cultural sensitivities poses challenges for anatomists conducting outreach events. This study aimed to explore these issues by examining the international landscape of anatomical public engagement. A multi-language, online survey was distributed to anatomists worldwide with the help of the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists (IFAA), asking open-ended questions about their experiences and perspectives on good and bad public engagement practices, appropriate resources, cultural and accessibility considerations, and training needs. Responses from 50 participants across various continents were analyzed using inductive semantic thematic analysis. Eight major themes were identified, revealing problematic practices, considerations for designing effective outreach, and the importance of adapting outreach to audiences-all of which were underpinned by a need for more guidance. Respondents emphasized the importance of respectful and educational demonstrations, expressed varied opinions on the use of human and animal tissues, and highlighted the need to consider cultural norms and accessibility. Interactive, hands-on experiences were favored over didactic engagement methods. The findings highlight the need for establishing defined standards, ethical frameworks, and training programs to support anatomists in delivering inclusive and culturally aware outreach activities. Future research should explore public perspectives on effective anatomy engagement and address the identified gaps in training and resources. This study provides valuable insights for developing such guidelines and training programs to promote effective and ethical public engagement in anatomy.
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.