ArticleAnatomical sciences education2025
Exploring spatial understanding and cognitive load using ultrasound in learning cardiac anatomy: A pilot study.
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.
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.
- A serious video game for teaching basic point-of-care echocardiography skills: a non-inferiority trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Visualizing Anatomy: Comparing the Pedagogical Impact of Chalkboard Teaching and 3D Models.Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Multidimensional training in dental anatomy teaching of oral anatomy and physiology: practice and effectiveness.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Exploring spatial understanding and cognitive load using ultrasound in learning cardiac anatomy: A pilot study.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
Although ultrasound (US) appears to complement traditional anatomy teaching, limited objective data exist on its efficacy. Existing literature often relies on student perceptions rather than performance-based outcomes. Additionally, the role of spatial understanding (SU)-the ability to mentally manipulate and interpret 3D anatomical relationships-and cognitive load (CL)-the mental effort required to learn-remains underexplored in the context of US-based instruction. The study consisted of three parts, with assessments before and after the US session. Prior to the session, students completed two paper-based tests on SU and cardiovascular system (CVS) anatomy. During the session, cardiac anatomy was explored through an introduction to US physics, a practical demonstration, and hands-on practice. Post-session, SU and CVS knowledge were reassessed, and participants completed a CL Scale Questionnaire. Thirty-one students participated in the study. Pre- and post-testing of CVS anatomy knowledge showed a mean increase of 11.33% (p < 0.05), while participants' mean SU scores improved from 65.71% to 81.04% (p < 0.05). The highest student rating on the CL Scale was observed when measuring the germane load, specifically the item assessing perceived learning (8.55 ± 1.31), while the lowest rating was reported for measurement of extraneous load, particularly the item assessing distractions (1.23 ± 1.61). This study provided insightful reports on the efficacy of US on SU and CL in anatomy education, showing its potential to improve learning outcomes and prepare students for clinical practice.
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.