ArticleCureus2025
Medical Students' Perception Toward Various Human Anatomy Teaching Methods in Khartoum, Sudan.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
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
Background Anatomy teaching uses both traditional and modern methods. Although cadaveric dissection remains the gold standard, students face challenges in visualizing embryological processes and applying histological knowledge clinically. Prior studies have mainly focused on Western medical schools, overlooking resource-limited settings such as Sudan. This study aimed to explore students' perceptions of anatomy teaching methods in such a setting. Methodology A cross-sectional survey was conducted among second to fifth-year medical students who had completed at least half of their anatomy syllabus. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire and analyzed using SPSS version 29 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results A total of 248 students participated in this study, with a response rate of 77.0%; 63.7% of the participants were female. Overall, 43% favored lecture-based teaching. For practical sessions, the most preferred approaches were labeled structures combined with on-body teaching (84.7%), dissected bodies (48.4%), anatomical models (39.1%), and multimedia resources (34.7%). Reported challenges in embryology included difficulty understanding developmental sequences, limited time, and visualization difficulties (52.4%), while histology challenges centered on insufficient lecture (33.9%) and practical (33.1%) time. Gender comparisons showed no significant differences in preferences, challenges, or proposed solutions (p > 0.05). Conclusions Students favor a blended approach that combines traditional cadaveric dissection with modern visual tools, clinical integration, and increased time for histology and embryology.
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.