Anatomical knowledge among Medical, Dental and Health Science Professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discipline of anatomy is an integral part of curriculum for Medical, Dental and Health Sciences programs. The evolution in undergraduate medical school curricula has significantly impacted the anatomy education. The application of anatomical knowledge plays a crucial role in daily clinical practice. This review was aimed to evaluate the anatomical knowledge among the medical, dental and health science professionals, and their perceptions on application of anatomical knowledge in clinical practice. A computerized literature search which includes PubMed, Web of knowledge and Ovid Medline, was performed. The studies in the English language and published in year 2000 onwards were included. Most of the studies were done in UK and Spain followed by Australia, US and Canada. The studies conducted among Medical and Chiropractic professions were 50% and 14% respectively. The rest of the studies were done among dentistry, podiatry, physiotherapy, radiographer and nursing students. The students with preclinical exposure scored significantly higher than those without preclinical exposure. The medical students and clinical educators perceived that the application of anatomical knowledge is not strong enough for clinical practice. The virtual medical museum, case-based learning, peer-assisted learning, inter-professional forum and the recapitulation of anatomy in clinical years are suggested to improve in anatomy education. The curriculum design, early clinical exposure, revision of course content, adequacy of learning resources and assessment methods contribute to enhance the students' learning and their ability to apply the anatomical knowledge in daily practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.078 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".