↓ Skip to main content

Cadaver-specific CT scans visualized at the dissection table combined with virtual dissection tables improve learning performance in general gross anatomy

Overview of attention for article published in European Radiology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
Title
Cadaver-specific CT scans visualized at the dissection table combined with virtual dissection tables improve learning performance in general gross anatomy
Published in
European Radiology, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00330-016-4554-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Paech, Frederik L. Giesel, Roland Unterhinninghofen, Heinz-Peter Schlemmer, Thomas Kuner, Sara Doll

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to quantify the benefit of the incorporation of radiologic anatomy (RA), in terms of student training in RA seminars, cadaver CT scans and life-size virtual dissection tables on the learning success in general anatomy. Three groups of a total of 238 students were compared in a multiple choice general anatomy exam during first-year gross anatomy: (1) a group (year 2015, n 1 = 50) that received training in radiologic image interpretation (RA seminar) and additional access to cadaver CT scans (CT + seminar group); (2) a group (2011, n 2 = 90) that was trained in the RA seminar only (RA seminar group); (3) a group (2011, n 3 = 98) without any radiologic image interpretation training (conventional anatomy group). Furthermore, the students' perception of the new curriculum was assessed qualitatively through a survey. The average test score of the CT + seminar group (21.8 ± 5.0) was significantly higher when compared to both the RA seminar group (18.3 ± 5.0) and the conventional anatomy group (17.1 ± 4.7) (p < 0.001). The incorporation of cadaver CT scans and life-size virtual dissection tables significantly improved the performance of medical students in general gross anatomy. Medical imaging and virtual dissection should therefore be considered to be part of the standard curriculum of gross anatomy. • Students provided with cadaver CT scans achieved 27 % higher scores in anatomy. • Radiological education integrated into gross anatomy is highly appreciated by medical students. • Simultaneous physical and virtual dissection provide unique conditions to study anatomy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 127 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Researcher 11 9%
Lecturer 10 8%
Student > Master 9 7%
Other 33 26%
Unknown 35 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 31%
Computer Science 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 23 18%
Unknown 43 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,201,742
of 25,269,846 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#2,853
of 4,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,473
of 347,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#21
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,269,846 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,918 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.