Positive Impact of an Interactive 3D Neuroanatomy E‐learning Resource on Students' Spatial Neuroanatomical Knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuroanatomy is one of the most challenging topics in anatomy for many novice students, who report it to be the most difficult subject in their anatomy curriculum. A primary reason for the perceived difficulties is the high degree of spatial complexity that exists between structures. The development of interactive three‐dimensional (3D) models in neuroanatomy curricula may provide an effective solution for alleviating difficulties students encountered with two‐dimensional (2D) learning resources, however this has yet to be fully examined in the literature. Interactive 3D and 2D e‐learning resources, as well as a novel virtual syncretion assessment tool, were developed to complement undergraduate anatomy instruction. The virtual syncretion assessment required participants to place neuroanatomical structures in a partial 3D neuroanatomical model. This assessment format allowed for the evaluation of spatial knowledge based on the accuracy of the 3D placement of structures rather than conventional nominal responses. Performance on the virtual syncretion assessment was measured by both the selection of correct structures, and the accuracy of the placement of structures within the partial 3D neuroanatomical model. One hundred seventy‐three participants completed the study, which utilized a cross‐over design to separate participants into two groups. Each group initially completed an anatomy knowledge pretest, followed by access to either the 3D or 2D neuroanatomy e‐learning resource. Participants completed both an anatomy knowledge quiz and virtual syncretion assessment prior to utilizing the second learning resource. A second anatomy knowledge quiz and virtual syncretion assessment were administered following participants' exposure to the second e‐learning resource. Anatomy knowledge quiz scores of participants who initially accessed the 3D learning resource increased significantly more than the students who initially accessed the 2D e‐learning module. Participants who initially utilized the 3D e‐learning resource performed significantly better on the digital syncretion assessment than participants who initially utilized the 2D e‐learning resource. Additionally, participants who accessed the 3D e‐learning resource subsequent to the 2D e‐learning resource significantly improved their performance on the final virtual syncretion assessment. No significant improvement in performance was observed for participants who accessed the 2D e‐learning resource subsequent to the 3D e‐learning resource. Results of this study could be used to inform the effective development and deployment of interactive 3D e‐learning resources to improve neuroanatomy instruction and assessment. Support or Funding Information Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".