ReviewJournal of medical education and curricular development
Fresh Human Donor Tissue in Anatomy Education: Task Fidelity, Procedural Relevance, and Curriculum Design Implications.
Review in Journal of medical education and curricular development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Gross anatomy is now delivered in curricula that are increasingly compressed and integrated with other areas of medical training. At the same time, digital resources and physical models have become more common as supplementary tools in anatomy education. These shifts have renewed interest in the distinctive educational value of donor-based learning and in how preservation methods should be aligned with clinically meaningful learning objectives. This narrative review examines the use of fresh human donor tissue in anatomy teaching and clinically oriented procedural training. It focuses on unembalmed, non-fixed, and fresh-frozen tissue, while soft-preserved tissue is considered mainly as contextual and comparative evidence. Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and ERIC databases for English-language human studies published from 2015 through early 2026, with backward citation to identify older landmark comparator papers. Because the preservation-explicit educational literature was limited and heterogenous, findings were synthesized narratively. Across the included literature, fresh tissue appears most educationally valuable when learning objectives depend on functional tissue behavior, including tissue palpation, percussion, tissue-plane recognition, ultrasound-guided anatomy, or realistic procedural handling. Available studies suggest benefits in selected knowledge and performance outcomes, especially in clinically oriented examination and postgraduate refresher courses. Comparator evidence indicates that soft-preserved tissue may provide a pragmatic alternative when programs need repeated access or broader curricular integration while still preserving more realistic handling than formal fixed donors. Formalin fixed tissue remains useful for durable structural teaching despite reduced functional realism. Overall, preservation methods should be treated as a curricular design decision rather than a neutral technical detail. Fresh tissue therefore has a defensible place in competency-based anatomy education when used selectively for tasks requiring high functional fidelity, although stronger evidence for long-term clinical transfer remains limited.
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.