Using a Dissection‐based Introductory Laboratory Video to Reduce the Anxiety State of Dissection‐ and Prosection‐based Anatomy Students Prior to their First Cadaver‐based Laboratory Experience
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Research shows that while many medical students express a positive attitude toward their first cadaveric laboratory experience, some students undergo mental distress in the form of an increased anxiety state. Although recent studies have shown that this anxiety diminishes after the students' first laboratory experience, the use of targeted preparatory tools to ease the transition is recommended. The goal of this study was to examine whether a short dissection-based introductory video has any effect on the increased anxiety state students face prior to their first cadaver-based laboratory session. Moreover, this study also sought to investigate the role of gender and laboratory type (i.e. dissection and prosection) on student anxiety state. A short (<3.5 minute) introductory video was incorporated into the pre-laboratory sessions of third-year non-medical undergraduate human anatomy students enrolled in dissection (n=198) and prosection (n=75) laboratories at the University of Guelph. The narrated introductory video incorporates uplifting background music and bright scenes showcasing the building, laboratory space, a student-centered laboratory session, and lastly a time-lapse overview of the first laboratory dissection. Self-reported anxiety state was measured using a validated visual analogue scale (VAS), and a validated 6-item abbreviated form of the Spielberger state-trait anxiety inventory survey (6-STAI). Surveys were administered at three-time points during the students' first laboratory: pre-laboratory pre-video (T1), pre-laboratory post-video (T2), and post-laboratory 1 (T3). Overall, there was a reduction in anxiety state level reported at T2 (Fig. 1), however it was not statistically significant (p > .05). A three-way mixed ANOVA showed that three-way interaction between time, gender and anxiety was not statistically significant, F(1.816, 490.282) = 1.771, p = .175. However, there was a statistically significant two-way interaction between time and gender, F(1.816, 490.282) = 5.460, p = .006, along with time and lab-type, F(1.816, 490.282) = 4.344, p = .016. There was a significant simple main effect of gender during T1, F(1, 270) = 11.408, p = .001, during T2, F(1, 270) = 21.553, p = .000, and during T3, F(1, 270) = 5.549, p = .019. Finally, there was a significant simple main effect of lab-type during T3, F(1, 270) = 23.916, p = .000, but not during T1, F(1, 270) = .793, p = .374, or T2 F(1, 270) = 2.240, p = .136. All pairwise comparisons were performed for statistically significant simple main effects. Anxiety levels at all three points were lower in males than females, a mean difference of −10.111 p = .001, −14.298 p = .000, and −5.087, p = .001 were observed. Moreover, T3 anxiety levels were significantly lower in the dissectors cohort than the prosectors cohort, a mean difference of −10.561 p = .000 In conclusion, the results display a significant decrease in the self-reported anxiety state of students enrolled in the dissection cohort immediately after their first laboratory (Fig. 2), suggesting a dissection-based introductory video may be more beneficial for dissectors, as it may have indirectly served as a dissection-guide amongst other things. Moreover, males displayed significantly lower anxiety levels than females at T1, T2, and T3 (Fig. 3), prompting future study to explore this effect. VAS Reported Anxiety Level - Time vs. Gender vs. Lab-type VAS Reported Anxiety Level - Time vs. Lab-type VAS Reported Anxiety Level - Time vs. Gender VAS Reported Anxiety Level - Time vs. Gender vs. Lab-type VAS Reported Anxiety Level - Time vs. Lab-type VAS Reported Anxiety Level - Time vs. Gender
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».