{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.049394221808014914, 'fraction_numerical': 0.048462255358807084, 'mean_word_length': 4.740641711229946, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Back to basics

The present study sought to establish findings and share views concerning the teaching of gross anatomy. The conclusions were drawn from feedback taken in 1995 from Year 1 (M1) through Year 5 (M5) (final year) medical students at the National University of Singapore. The survey was taken from two groups of students that had gone through two different curricula. The first group of M4 and M5 students studied under an old curriculum that taught anatomy over a period of three semesters. The second group of M1 through M3 students studied under a new curriculum of two semesters' duration. Altogether, 546 (M1: 147; M2: 120; M3: 78; M4: 107; M5: 97) completed questionnaires were analyzed. Throughout the years of study, the majority of students found dissection helpful (55.2–72.7%) or very helpful (18.9–40.7%) in their understanding of gross anatomy. A minority of students (0–25.3%) found it not helpful. Taking all of the five years of students together, this would mean that 60.7% of the students found dissection helpful and 28% of them found it very helpful in their understanding of gross anatomy. Of the M3 students who had both dissection and demonstrations on prosected specimens, the majority of them found dissection helpful (55.2%) or very helpful (33.3%); they also found demonstrations on prosected specimens helpful (64.6%), or very helpful (27.8%). When asked whether dissection should be replaced completely by demonstrations on prosected specimens, 86.7% gave a resounding no. With regard to gross anatomy coverage, 11.7% of M4 and M5 students found it inadequate, 67.5% adequate, and 20.8% excessive. Only 1% of these students found that the gross anatomy they had learned was of no clinical relevance; 22.3% found it of little clinical relevance; and an overwhelming majority (76.7%) found it mostly clinically relevant. Most were grateful that they had been taught the basics of gross anatomy. These findings are discussed with an emphasis on the time needed and deep level approach required to gain conceptual understanding of anatomical organization. Clin. Anat. 12:422–426, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.