ArticleAnatomical sciences education2025
Seven questions for a student's donor: Evaluation of a fictional conversation lends insight into professional identity formation in medical students.
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.
- Anatomy at the threshold: Teaching the human body in a hybrid age.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
- Seven questions for a student's donor: Evaluation of a fictional conversation lends insight into professional identity formation in medical students.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
- Objectification, Desensitization, and Personification: Medical Student Strategies for Engaging with Donor Bodies in the Anatomy Lab.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reflection exercises have been used within anatomy education to evaluate empathy, humanism, and professionalism. A typical reflection exercise consists of directed prompts to guide the student's reflection as it relates to the experience and/or research question. The aim of this study was to utilize reflections through an open-ended format to enable students to explore their experience participating in donor dissection as they form their professional identity. The "Seven Questions" exercise was developed to create an imaginary discourse between the medical student and their donor. Students were prompted to provide seven questions they would like to ask their donor, if still living, and provide a 2-3 sentence explanation as to their interest, meaning, and/or purpose of each question. Submissions (n = 418) were evaluated using thematic analysis and four themes were identified: body donation, career development, patient history, and donor gestalt. The theme of body donation included questions specific to the decision to donate one's body for medical education, sharing one's decision with family and electing educational vs. organ donation. The career development theme included questions focused on the donor's previous experience with physicians, hesitation regarding student dissection, and advice for the student dissector. The third theme, patient history, included inquiries related to social history, review of systems, and family history. The final theme of donor gestalt focused on the donor's self-care and legacy. Student responses suggest that dissection and the donor experience organically support students modeling physician behaviors and should be considered as an educational opportunity to aid in developing physician identity.
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.