Effective methods of teaching and learning in anatomy as a basic science: A BEME systematic review: BEME guide no. 44

References

• AbouHashem Y, Dayal M, Savanah S, Strkalj G. 2015. The application of 3D printing in anatomy education. Med Educ Online. 20:29847.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams JW, Paxton L, Dawes K, Burlak K, Quayle M, McMenamin PG. 2015. 3D printed reproductions of orbital dissections: a novel mode of visualising anatomy for trainees in ophthalmology or optometry. Br J Ophthalmol. 99:1162–1167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adibi I, Hasani N, Ashoorioun V, Sadrearhami S, Monajemi AR. 2007. Integrating physical examination and trunk anatomy; a new course for second year medical students. Med Teach. 29:975–977.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AlNassar SA, Hajjar W, Rahal S, Clifton J, Finley R, Sidhu R. 2012. The use of thoracoscopy to enhance medical students’ interest and understanding of thoracic anatomy. Ann Thorac Med. 7:145–148.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arraez-Aybar LA, Sanchez-Montesinos I, Mirapeix RM, Mompeo-Corredera B, Sanudo-Tejero JR. 2010. Relevance of human anatomy in daily clinical practice. Ann Anat. 192:341–348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aspegren K. 1999. BEME Guide No. 2: teaching and learning communication skills in medicine-a review with quality grading of articles. Med Teach. 21:563–570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bareither ML, Arbel V, Growe M, Muszczynski E, Rudd A, Marone JR. 2013. Clay modeling versus written modules as effective interventions in understanding human anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 6:170–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benly P. 2014. Teaching methodologies on anatomy-a review. J Pharm Sci Res. 6:242–243.
   Google Scholar
• Bergman EM, Verheijen IWH, Scherpbier AJJA, Van der Vleuten CPM, Bruin ABH. 2014. Influences on anatomical knowledge: the complete arguments. Clin Anat. 27:296–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Böckers A, Mayer C, Böckers TM. 2014. Does learning in clinical context in anatomical sciences improve examination results, learning motivation, or learning orientation? Anat Sci Educ. 7:3–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boon JM, Meiring JH, Richards PA, Jacobs CJ. 2001. Evaluation of clinical relevance of problem-oriented teaching in undergraduate anatomy at the University of Pretoria. Surg Radiol Anat. 23:57–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brophy JE. 2013. Motivating students to learn, New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Brown PM, Hamilton NM, Denison AR. 2012. A novel 3D stereoscopic anatomy tutorial. Clin Teach. 9:50–53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chappuis J, Stiggins RJ, Chappuis S, Arter JA. 2013. Classroom assessment for student learning: doing it right-using it well. Pearson New International Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Higher Ed.
   Google Scholar
• Chen KC, Glicksman JT, Haase P, Johnson M, Wilson T, Fung K. 2010. Introduction of a novel teaching paradigm for head and neck anatomy. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 39:349–355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinnah TI, De Bere SR, Collett T. 2011. Students’ views on the impact of peer physical examination and palpation as a pedagogic tool for teaching and learning living human anatomy. Med Teach. 33:e27–e36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung E-K, Nam K-I, Oh S-A, Han E-R, Woo Y-J, Hitchcock MA. 2013. Advance organizers in a gross anatomy dissection course and their effects on academic achievement. Clin Anat. 26:327–332.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Codd AM, Choudhury B. 2011. Virtual reality anatomy: is it comparable with traditional methods in the teaching of human forearm musculoskeletal anatomy? Anat Sci Educ. 4:119–125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coffield F, Moseley D, Hall E, Ecclestone K. 2004a. Learning styles and pedagogy in post 16 learning: a systematic and critical review. LSRC Reference. London: The Learning and Skills Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Coffield F, Moseley D, Hall E, Ecclestone K. 2004b. Should we be using learning styles? What research has to say to practice. LSRC Reference. London: The Learning and Skills Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Collins J. 2008. Modern approaches to teaching and learning anatomy. BMJ 337:665.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colthart I, Bagnall G, Evans A, Allbutt H, Haig A, Illing J, McKinstry B. 2008. The effectiveness of self-assessment on the identification of learner needs, learner activity, and impact on clinical practice: BEME guide no. 10. Med Teach. 30:124–145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donnelly L, Patten D, White P, Finn G. 2009. Virtual human dissector as a learning tool for studying cross-sectional anatomy. Med Teach. 31:553.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drake RL, McBride JM, Lachman N, Pawlina W. 2009. Medical education in the anatomical sciences: the winds of change continue to blow. Anat Sci Educ. 2:253–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubuque EM. 2011. Automating academic literature searches with RSS feeds and Google Reader™. Behav Anal Pract. 4:63.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Field A. 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage publications.
   Google Scholar
• Finn GM, Walker SJ, Carter M, Cox DR, Hewitson R, Smith CF. 2015. Exploring relationships between personality and anatomy performance. Anat Sci Educ. 8:547–554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleming ND. 2006. Teaching and learning styles: VARK strategies. Christchurch, New Zeeland: ND Fleming.
   Google Scholar
• Fredricks KT, Wegner WM. 2003. Clinical relevance of anatomy and physiology: a senior/freshman mentoring experience. Nurse Educ. 28:197–199.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fritz D, Hu A, Wilson T, Ladak H, Haase P, Fung K. 2011. Long-term retention of a 3-dimensional educational computer model of the larynx: a follow-up study. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 137:598–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganguly PK. 2010. Teaching and learning of anatomy in the 21st century: direction and the strategies. Open Med Educ J. 3:5–10.
   Google Scholar
• Glittenberg C, Binder S. 2006. Using 3D computer simulations to enhance ophthalmic training. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 26:40–49.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gradl-Dietsch G, Korden T, Modabber A, Sönmez TT, Stromps J-P, Ganse B, Pape H-C, Knobe M. 2016. Multidimensional approach to teaching anatomy—do gender and learning style matter? Ann Anat. 208:158–164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griksaitis MJ, Sawdon MA, Finn GM. 2012. Ultrasound and cadaveric prosections as methods for teaching cardiac anatomy: a comparative study. Anat Sci Educ. 5:20–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haig A, Dozier M. 2003. BEME Guide no 3: systematic searching for evidence in medical education-Part 1: sources of information. Med Teach. 25:352–363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammick M, Dornan T, Steinert Y. 2010. Conducting a best evidence systematic review. Part 1: from idea to data coding. BEME guide no. 13. Med Teach. 32:3–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammoudi N, Arangalage D, Boubrit L, Renaud MC, Isnard R, Collet JP, Cohen A, Duguet A. 2013. Ultrasound-based teaching of cardiac anatomy and physiology to undergraduate medical students. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 106:487–491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hampton BS, Sung VW. 2010. Improving medical student knowledge of female pelvic floor dysfunction and anatomy: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 202:601.e601–608.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hean S, Anderson L, Green C, O’Halloran C, Pitt R, Morris D, John C, Temple J. 2012. Protocol: a systematic review of the contribution of theory to the development & delivery of effective interprofessional curricula in health professional education.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins J. 2011. Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration 5, updated March 2011. The Cochrane Collaboration.
   Google Scholar
• Hofer RE, Brant Nikolaus O, Pawlina W. 2011. Using checklists in a gross anatomy laboratory improves learning outcomes and dissection quality. Anat Sci Educ. 4:249–255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopkins R, Regehr G, Wilson TD. 2011. Exploring the changing learning environment of the gross anatomy lab. Acad Med. 86:883–888.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu A, Wilson T, Ladak H, Haase P, Doyle P, Fung K. 2010. Evaluation of a three-dimensional educational computer model of the larynx: voicing a new direction. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 39:315–322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Issenberg BS, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. 2005. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 27:10–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson EB. 2002. Contextual teaching and learning: what it is and why it’s here to stay. Thousand Oaks (CA): Corwin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jurjus RA, Dimorier K, Brown K, Slaby F, Shokoohi H, Boniface K, Liu YT. 2014. Can anatomists teach living anatomy using ultrasound as a teaching tool? Anat Sci Educ. 7:340–349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keedy AW, Durack JC, Sandhu P, Chen EM, O’Sullivan PS, Breiman RS. 2011. Comparison of traditional methods with 3D computer models in the instruction of hepatobiliary anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 4:84–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerby J, Shukur ZN, Shalhoub J. 2011. The relationships between learning outcomes and methods of teaching anatomy as perceived by medical students. Clin Anat. 24:489–497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkpatrick DL, Brodwell M. 1974. Evaluation of training. CREDR Corporation. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Knobe M, Carow JB, Ruesseler M, Leu BM, Simon M, Beckers SK, Ghassemi A, Sönmez TT, Pape H-C. 2012. Arthroscopy or ultrasound in undergraduate anatomy education: a randomized cross-over controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 12:85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kooloos JG, Schepens-Franke AN, Bergman EM, Donders RA, Vorstenbosch MA. 2014. Anatomical knowledge gain through a clay-modeling exercise compared to live and video observations. Anat Sci Educ. 7:420–429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis MJ. 2003. Computer-assisted learning for teaching anatomy and physiology in subjects allied to medicine. Med Teach. 25:204–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liew SC, Sidhu J, Barua A. 2015. The relationship between learning preferences (styles and approaches) and learning outcomes among pre-clinical undergraduate medical students. BMC Med Educ 15:44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim KH, Loo ZY, Goldie SJ, Adams JW, McMenamin PG. 2015. Use of 3D printed models in medical education: a randomized control trial comparing 3D prints versus cadaveric materials for learning external cardiac anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 9:213–221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin K, Bessell NJ, Scholten I. 2014. The perceived importance of anatomy and neuroanatomy in the practice of speech-language pathology. Anat Sci Educ. 7:28–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLachlan JC, Patten D. 2006. Anatomy teaching: ghosts of the past, present and future. Med Educ. 40:243–253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Int Med. 338:264–269.
   Google Scholar
• Musumeci G, Loreto C, Mazzone V, Szychlinska MA, Castrogiovanni P, Castorina S. 2014. Practical training on porcine hearts enhances students' knowledge of human cardiac anatomy. Ann Anat. 196:92–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicholson DT, Chalk C, Funnell WR, Daniel SJ. 2006. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model. Med Educ. 40:1081–1087.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Reilly MK, Reese S, Herlihy T, Geoghegan T, Cantwell CP, Feeney RN, Jones JF. 2015. Fabrication and assessment of 3D printed anatomical models of the lower limb for anatomical teaching and femoral vessel access training in medicine. Anat Sci Educ. 9:71–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Older J. 2004. Anatomy: a must for teaching the next generation. Surgeon. 2:79–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pani JR, Chariker JH, Naaz F. 2012. Computer-based learning: interleaving whole and sectional representation of neuroanatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 6:11–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pani JR, Chariker JH, Naaz F, Mattingly W, Roberts J, Sephton SE. 2014. Learning with interactive computer graphics in the undergraduate neuroscience classroom. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 19:507–528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papa V, Vaccarezza M. 2013. Teaching anatomy in the XXI century: new aspects and pitfalls. ScientificWorldJournal. 2013:310348
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preece D, Williams SB, Lam R, Weller R. 2013. “Let’s get physical advantages of a physical model over 3D computer models and textbooks in learning imaging anatomy”. Anat Sci Educ. 6:216–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qayumi A, Kurihara Y, Imai M, Pachev G, Seo H, Hoshino Y, Cheifetz R, Matsuura K, Momoi M, Saleem M. 2004. Comparison of computer‐assisted instruction (CAI) versus traditional textbook methods for training in abdominal examination (Japanese experience). Med Educ. 38:1080–1088.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rizzolo LJ. 2002. Human dissection: an approach to interweaving the traditional and humanistic goals of medical education. Anat Rec. 269:242–248.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saltarelli AJ, Roseth CJ, Saltarelli WA. 2014. Human cadavers vs. multimedia simulation: a study of student learning in anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 7:331–339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. 2010. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med. 8:18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh V, Kharb P. 2013. A paradigm shift from teaching to learning gross anatomy: meta-analysis of implications for instructional methods. J Anatom Soc India. 62:84–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith C, Mathias H. 2007. Educational perspectives on learning anatomy. J Anat. 210:774–775.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith CF, Mathias HS. 2011. What impact does anatomy education have on clinical practice? Clin Anat. 24:113–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanford W, Erkonen WE, Cassell MD, Moran BD, Easley G, Carris RL, Albanese MA. 1994. Evaluation of a computer-based program for teaching cardiac anatomy. Invest Radiol. 29:248–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling A, Birt J. 2014. An enriched multimedia eBook application to facilitate learning of anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 7:19–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. 2010. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ. 3:83–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takkunen M, Turpeinen H, Viisanen H, Wigren HK, Aarnio M, Pitkaniemi J. 2011. Introduction of real patients into problem-based learning in preclinical first-year anatomy curriculum. Med Teach. 33:854–856.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam MD, Hart AR, Williams S, Heylings D, Leinster S. 2009. Is learning anatomy facilitated by computer-aided learning? A review of the literature. Med Teach. 31:e393–e396.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam MD, Hart AR, Williams SM, Holland R, Heylings D, Leinster S. 2010. Evaluation of a computer program (‘disect’) to consolidate anatomy knowledge: a randomised-controlled trial. Med Teach. 32:e138–e142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ten Brinke B, Klitsie PJ, Timman R, Busschbach JJ, Lange JF, Kleinrensink GJ. 2014. Anatomy education and classroom versus laparoscopic dissection-based training: a randomized study at one medical school. Acad Med. 89:806–810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turney B. 2007. Anatomy in a modern medical curriculum. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 89:104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatiah J. 2010. Computer-assisted modules to enhance the learning of anatomy by dissection. Med Educ. 44:523–524.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson AB, Ross C, Petty M, Williams JM, Thorp LE. 2009. Bridging the transfer gap: laboratory exercise combines clinical exposure and anatomy review. Med Educ. 43:790–798.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wormald BW, Schoeman S, Somasunderam A, Penn M. 2009. Assessment drives learning: an unavoidable truth? Anat Sci Educ. 2:199–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yammine K, Violato C. 2014. A meta-analysis of the educational effectiveness of three-dimensional visualization technologies in teaching anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 8:525–538.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yammine K, Violato C. 2016. The effectiveness of physical models in teaching anatomy: a meta-analysis of comparative studies. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 21:883–895.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar