Interactive, Image-Based Modules as a Complement to Prosection-Based Anatomy Laboratories: Multicohort Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As medical and allied health curricula adapt to increasing time constraints, ethical considerations, and resource limitations, digital innovations are becoming vital supplements to donor-based anatomy instruction. While prior studies have examined the effectiveness of prosection versus dissection and the role of digital tools in anatomy learning, few resources align interactive digital modules directly with hands-on prosection experiences. OBJECTIVE: This project addresses that gap by introducing an integrated, curriculum-aligned platform for self-guided cadaveric learning. METHODS: We created Anatomy Interactives, a web-based laboratory manual structured to complement prosection laboratories for MD, DPT, and PA students. Modules were developed using iSpring Suite (iSpring Solutions Incorporated) and included interactive labeled images, donor photographs, and quiz-style self-assessments. Learners engaged with modules before, during, or after laboratory sessions. PA/DPT and MD students completed postcourse surveys evaluating module use and perceived impact. MD student examination scores from a 2023 cohort (no module access) were compared to a 2024 cohort (with access) to evaluate effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 147 students completed the survey (31 PA/DPT and 116 MD). The majority reported using modules for 1-2 hours per week and found them helpful for both written and laboratory examinations. MD students in the 2024 cohort performed better on all 3 examinations compared to the 2023 cohort, with 2 examination median differences reaching statistical significance (Mann-Whitney U, P<.001). Qualitative feedback highlighted accessibility, content reinforcement, and user engagement as key benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Interactive modules integrated with prosection laboratories enhanced learner engagement and performance. This hybrid digital-donor model shows promise for scalable, learner-centered gross anatomy education.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".