ArticleAnatomical sciences education2025
"The tactile realness of 'life' is hitting me in the face": Unprompted student reflections of dissection using formalin- and Thiel-embalmed donors.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impacts of body donor non-anonymization on students' educational and humanistic development: A systematic review.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Pooled it
- From classroom to clinic: Evaluating the educational utility of two Thiel embalming methods.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Article
- Reclaiming Anatomy as Method: From Morphological Reasoning to Clinical Relevance.Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- "The tactile realness of 'life' is hitting me in the face": Unprompted student reflections of dissection using formalin- and Thiel-embalmed donors.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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a wide variety of preservation techniques available, and anatomy departments can select an embalming method(s) that best suits their course outcomes. Thiel embalming is becoming popular due to the life-like color and flexibility it provides tissue. This study examined student-perceived impact of learning anatomy by dissecting Thiel-embalmed donors compared with formalin-embalmed donors, and evaluated the reflective learning portfolios of postgraduate anatomy students' over two different cohorts. The first cohort studied limb and back anatomy using formalin-embalmed donors, and afterward studied trunk anatomy using Thiel-embalmed donors. In the second cohort, the embalming methods (but not topics) were exchanged. Reflexive thematic analysis identified three themes: Comparison to formalin, Authenticity, and Approaches to Learning. The color and flexibility of Thiel tissues supported students to connect their anatomy learning to their future clinical practice; however, the same flexibility sometimes hindered student learning due to visceral structures losing their anatomical shape. Exposure to a different embalming method sparked reflections from more students in both cohorts, but more so from students who transitioned from formalin to Thiel. These same students felt the donor was rehumanized, prompting them to reflect on the importance of teamwork to support each other both academically and emotionally. This was not seen in students transitioning from Thiel to formalin, indicating that the order of exposure has importance. Educators should weigh up the advantages of using different embalming methods alongside their learning objectives and, if switching between embalming methods, should consider the impact that the sequence may have on student learning.
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.