Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41889206›Full record

ArticleClinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.)2026

Medical Student Preferences on the Anatomy of a Practical Exam.

Audrey H Nguyen, Christine Esparza, Matthew Darmadi, Peter J Boedeker, Adi Pinkas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Audrey H NguyenSchool of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8595-9973
Christine EsparzaSchool of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.
Matthew DarmadiSchool of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2670-1804
Peter J BoedekerDivision of Medical Education Research and Scholarship, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.
Adi PinkasSchool of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medical schools traditionally assess anatomy knowledge using individual, cadaver-based assessments during students' first and second years. Recently, some institutions have updated their anatomy curricula to emphasize virtual learning and team-based instruction or assessments. Despite the implications of these changes on student performance and satisfaction, there is limited literature describing medical students' preferences on the structure of anatomy practical exams. Since learners are a key stakeholder in assessment redesign, this quality improvement study sought to illuminate their perspectives on four aspects of anatomy practical exams. Our institution's Class of 2028 (n = 224) experienced four different anatomy practical exams during their first year, varying in anatomy viewing method, question type, and the addition of a group exam. To leverage their unique experience, this cohort was invited to complete a voluntary survey asking their preferences regarding the aforementioned conditions and preferred grading distribution of individual and group exams. They could explain each of their choices in optional free responses. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were used to analyze quantitative data, while thematic analysis identified patterns in the comments. All results were statistically significant (p < 0.001) and indicated preferences for specific variations to anatomy assessment. Of the 114 responses, 69.3% favored viewing the anatomy with pinned cadavers over digital images, citing the strengths of the three-dimensional orientation and reflection of anatomic variation. The majority (93.9%) preferred multiple choice over fill-in-the-blank questions for their relative ease and consistency with standardized exams. Most (72.8%) preferred an individual then group exam over an individual-only exam due to collaboration-enhanced learning. The two most favored grading distributions were Individual 90%/Group 10% (42.1%) and Individual 50%/Group 50% (22.8%). Reasons for the former included lesser penalty for disagreeing with group members and individual accountability, while those for the latter emphasized fairness. The most popular combination of answer choices (15.8%) matched the composite of the most favored option for each question. This study revealed our learners' priorities in the assessment process. Ultimately, it serves to guide anatomy curriculum directors in assessing their own students' preferences and designing practical exams with consideration for their viewpoints.

Indexed as

AnatomyEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalCadaverCurriculumHumansSurveys and Questionnairesanatomy educationanatomy practical examquality improvementteam‐based learning

Identifiers

PMID41889206
PMCPMC13472306

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.