Use of computer-aided holographic models improves performance in a cadaver dissection-based course in gross anatomy : Teaching Anatomy with Computer-Aided Holographic Models

The use of computer-generated 3-dimensional (3-D) anatomical models to teach anatomy has proliferated. However, there is little evidence that these models are educationally effective. The purpose of this study was to test the educational effectiveness of a computer-generated 3-D model of the middle and inner ear. We reconstructed a fully interactive model of the middle and inner ear from a magnetic resonance imaging scan of a human cadaver ear. To test the model's educational usefulness, we conducted a randomised controlled study in which 28 medical students completed a Web-based tutorial on ear anatomy that included the interactive model, while a control group of 29 students took the tutorial without exposure to the model. At the end of the tutorials, both groups were asked a series of 15 quiz questions to evaluate their knowledge of 3-D relationships within the ear. The intervention group's mean score on the quiz was 83%, while that of the control group was 65%. This difference in means was highly significant (P < 0.001). Our findings stand in contrast to the handful of previous randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effects of computer-generated 3-D anatomical models on learning. The equivocal and negative results of these previous studies may be due to the limitations of these studies (such as small sample size) as well as the limitations of the models that were studied (such as a lack of full interactivity). Given our positive results, we believe that further research is warranted concerning the educational effectiveness of computer-generated anatomical models.

To conduct a meta-analysis of published studies to determine the predictive validity of the MCAT on medical school performance and medical board licensing examinations. The authors included all peer-reviewed published studies reporting empirical data on the relationship between MCAT scores and medical school performance or medical board licensing exam measures. Moderator variables, participant characteristics, and medical school performance/medical board licensing exam measures were extracted and reviewed separately by three reviewers using a standardized protocol. Medical school performance measures from 11 studies and medical board licensing examinations from 18 studies, for a total of 23 studies, were selected. A random-effects model meta-analysis of weighted effects sizes (r) resulted in (1) a predictive validity coefficient for the MCAT in the preclinical years of r = 0.39 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.54) and on the USMLE Step 1 of r = 0.60 (95% CI, 0.50-0.67); and (2) the biological sciences subtest as the best predictor of medical school performance in the preclinical years (r = 0.32 95% CI, 0.21-0.42) and on the USMLE Step 1 (r = 0.48 95% CI, 0.41-0.54). The predictive validity of the MCAT ranges from small to medium for both medical school performance and medical board licensing exam measures. The medical profession is challenged to develop screening and selection criteria with improved validity that can supplement the MCAT as an important criterion for admission to medical schools.

The introduction of a problem-based learning (PBL) curriculum at the School of Medicine of the University of Melbourne has necessitated a reduction in the number of lectures and limited the use of dissection in teaching anatomy. In the new curriculum, students learn the anatomy of different body systems using PBL tutorials, practical classes, pre-dissected specimens, computer-aided learning multimedia and a few dissection classes. The aims of this study are: (1) to assess the views of first- and second-year medical students on the importance of dissection in learning about the anatomy, (2) to assess if students' views have been affected by demographic variables such as gender, academic background and being a local or an international student, and (3) to assess which educational tools helped them most in learning the anatomy and whether dissection sessions have helped them in better understanding anatomy. First- and second-year students enrolled in the medical course participated in this study. Students were asked to fill out a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire. Data was analysed using Mann-Whitney's U test, Wilcoxon's signed-ranks or the calculation of the Chi-square value. The response rates were 89% for both first- and second-year students. Compared to second-year students, first-year students perceived dissection to be important for deep understanding of anatomy (P < 0.001), making learning interesting (P < 0.001) and introducing them to emergency procedures (P < 0.001). Further, they preferred dissection over any other approach (P < 0.001). First-year students ranked dissection (44%), textbooks (23%), computer-aided learning (CAL), multimedia (10%), self-directed learning (6%) and lectures (5%) as the most valuable resources for learning anatomy, whereas second-year students found textbooks (38%), dissection (18%), pre-dissected specimens (11%), self-directed learning (9%), lectures (7%) and CAL programs (7%) as most useful. Neither of the groups showed a significant preference for pre-dissected specimens, CAL multimedia or lectures over dissection. Both first- and second-year students, regardless of their gender, academic background, or citizenship felt that the time devoted to dissection classes were not adequate. Students agreed that dissection deepened their understanding of anatomical structures, provided them with a three-dimensional perspective of structures and helped them recall what they learnt. Although their perception about the importance of dissection changed as they progressed in the course, good anatomy textbooks were perceived as an excellent resource for learning anatomy. Interestingly, innovations used in teaching anatomy, such as interactive multimedia resources, have not replaced students' perceptions about the importance of dissection.