TY - JOUR
T1 - The Level of Anatomical Knowledge, Hard to Establish
T2 - a Systematic Narrative Review
AU - Koppes, Dorothea Maria
AU - Triepels, Charlotte Petronella Robertus
AU - Notten, Kim Josephina Bernadette
AU - Smeets, Carlijn Franscisca Anna
AU - Kruitwagen, Rutgerus Franciscus Petrus Maria
AU - van Gorp, Toon
AU - Scheele, Fedde
AU - van Kuijk, Sander Martijn Job
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/4
Y1 - 2022/4
N2 - Objective: This literature review aimed to gain more insight into the level of anatomical knowledge based on published measurements among medical students, residents, fellows, and specialists. Methods: We performed an extensive literature search in three online databases: Medline (using PubMed), Web of Science, and Education Resources Information Centre (ERIC). Results: A total of 30 relevant studies were found. In these studies, participants took different anatomy tests, and their mean/median scaled scores range from 22.5 to 82.4% on a 0 to 100% scale. Conclusion: This review provides an overview of what is known about measured anatomical knowledge. After critically reviewing the literature, we have to conclude that the existing literature confirms that anatomical knowledge is hard to establish, mainly due to the lack of standardisation. Further research should focus on ways to define and assess ‘desired anatomical knowledge’ in different contexts. In a next phase, we can discuss if anatomical knowledge is lacking and if interventions are needed.
AB - Objective: This literature review aimed to gain more insight into the level of anatomical knowledge based on published measurements among medical students, residents, fellows, and specialists. Methods: We performed an extensive literature search in three online databases: Medline (using PubMed), Web of Science, and Education Resources Information Centre (ERIC). Results: A total of 30 relevant studies were found. In these studies, participants took different anatomy tests, and their mean/median scaled scores range from 22.5 to 82.4% on a 0 to 100% scale. Conclusion: This review provides an overview of what is known about measured anatomical knowledge. After critically reviewing the literature, we have to conclude that the existing literature confirms that anatomical knowledge is hard to establish, mainly due to the lack of standardisation. Further research should focus on ways to define and assess ‘desired anatomical knowledge’ in different contexts. In a next phase, we can discuss if anatomical knowledge is lacking and if interventions are needed.
KW - Anatomy
KW - Knowledge
KW - Scientific perspectives
KW - Test
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85127407813&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85127407813&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-022-01509-w
DO - https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-022-01509-w
M3 - Review article
C2 - 35528299
SN - 2156-8650
VL - 32
SP - 569
EP - 581
JO - Medical Science Educator
JF - Medical Science Educator
IS - 2
ER -