ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2026
What are We Measuring in Anatomy Education? An Exploratory Mapping from Anatomical Learning to Clinical Competence.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anatomical knowledge is a necessary foundation for clinical practice, but clinical competence develops progressively through its integration with other foundational sciences and supervised clinical experience. The extent to which anatomy education research evaluates downstream application of anatomical learning remains unclear. In this Perspective, supported by an exploratory metadata-based mapping, we examined whether reported outcomes are concentrated at proximal educational levels or extend to clinical performance and healthcare impact. A Scopus search conducted on 2 June 2026 retrieved 19,956 records. After duplicate removal, restriction to original articles, and application of predefined anatomy-education filters, 8088 articles were retained. Titles, abstracts, and author keywords were classified using conservative hierarchical rules into perception/descriptive outcomes, anatomical knowledge, applied anatomical skills, clinical reasoning/professional behavior, patient/healthcare impact, or unclear/not classified. Outcomes related to clinical reasoning/professional behavior and patient/healthcare impact, the two highest translational categories, were identified in 3.20% of the refined corpus and 4.24% of classified records. Signals corresponding to applied anatomical skills, clinical reasoning/professional behavior, or patient/healthcare impact increased over time, whereas the odds of outcomes specifically related to clinical reasoning/professional behavior or patient/healthcare impact did not increase significantly. These findings do not indicate that anatomy education fails to contribute to clinical competence. Rather, they suggest that the literature more often documents proximal or applied outcomes than direct downstream transfer. Outcome selection should therefore be aligned with the stated purpose and curricular stage of each intervention, while future longitudinal and clinically integrated studies examine anatomy's contributory role within the broader development of competence.
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.