Online anatomy laboratory: a new way to educate allied health students
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction and Objective In‐person cadaveric anatomy laboratories allow for students to learn the intricacies of the human body but also develop skills related to communication, clinical reasoning, and interprofessional collaboration. However, the Covid‐19 pandemic caused a shift from in‐person course delivery to an online medium. Therefore, the objective of this study was to develop and evaluate the implementation and use of an online anatomy laboratory as a replacement for an in‐person laboratory component. It is hypothesized that presenting cadaveric images of gross specimens and utilizing break out rooms can mimic aspects of in‐person instruction and facilitate teaching anatomy using an online modality. Materials and Methods An anatomy course for allied heath students (Pharmacy and respiratory therapy (RT)) that included an in‐person cadaveric laboratory was modified for online delivery. The laboratory component utilized cadaveric images presented by the instructor and breakout rooms for small group discussion to simulate in‐person anatomy laboratory experiences. Academic performance of the online cohort was compared to previous in‐person cohorts to evaluate students’ learning of human anatomy in an online laboratory. Upon completion of the online course, students (n=35) completed a questionnaire containing Likert scale and open‐ended questions regarding online anatomy learning. Questions related to cadaveric images presented, breakout room use and online instruction were used to evaluate the student experience of an online anatomy laboratory. Results Online anatomical studies had no academic advantage or disadvantage compared to in‐person instruction. From the survey results, students indicated that the online laboratories were enjoyable and helpful for learning anatomy (3.3±0.15 and 3.8±0.16 respectively). Students rated the guided cadaveric image portion very highly (4.37±0.13) and the use of cadaveric pictures as an appropriate learning tool in the online setting (4.07±0.13). Students also responded positively to the helpfulness of breakout room sessions in learning anatomy (3.14±0.17). Open‐ended comments revealed that students appreciated the presentation of cadaveric images and the ability to ask questions in real time to the instructor. Furthermore, students noted the advantage of discussing anatomical concepts and clinical correlations with their peers in a small group breakout room format. Conclusion and Significance Moving from an in‐person to an online anatomy laboratory experience for pharmacy and RT students had no adverse effect on learning human anatomy. Health professional students found the use of cadaveric images and the use of breakout rooms for small group learning an acceptable and appropriate substitute to traditional in‐person cadaveric anatomy laboratories. Based on the results of this study, online delivery of an anatomy laboratory, that was developed to simulate important aspects of in‐person learning, can act as a viable alternative‐learning platform for anatomical laboratory education.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 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 ».