Logo image
Back
A Practical Examination and Feedback Survey Evaluating Learners Taught Using Physical Prosections vs. 3D Models of Prosections of the External Heart
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

A Practical Examination and Feedback Survey Evaluating Learners Taught Using Physical Prosections vs. 3D Models of Prosections of the External Heart

Stephanie A. Waldman, Zane Sejdiu, Shannon M. O’Hara, Jed S Shumsky and Caitlin A Howe
Frontiers of Digital Education, v 2, 27
26 Jun 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44366-025-0064-9
Featured in Collection :   Research Supported by Drexel Libraries' OA Programs
url
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44366-025-0064-9View
Published, Version of Record (VoR)Open Access via Drexel Libraries Read and Publish Program 2025CC BY V4.0,  Open

Abstract

Anatomy Educational Research
When incorporating new technology into medical curricula, it is essential to evaluate student success and resource preference. Our team created a database of virtual 3D scanned prosections for students to use while studying Gross Anatomy. Incoming first year medical students were recruited to take part in a study examining the effectiveness and preference for this resource. The study was conducted in four parts: first, a pre-test using physical prosections and images of virtual 3D scans of prosections; second, a teaching session using physical prosections or virtual 3D scans of prosections; third, a post-test identical to the pre-test; forth, a post-test survey. Twenty-nine students participated in this study (physical prosection teaching group [physical]= 15; virtual 3D scans teaching group [virtual] = 14). Exam scores significantly increased in both groups regardless of past anatomy experience with no significance found between groups (physical = 42.6% ± 17.9%; virtual = 44.3% ± 24.0%; P < 0.01). Students taught using the virtual 3D scans were more likely to agree that they “would be able to sufficiently learn anatomy using 3D scans” (physical = 3.0 ± 0.8; virtual = 4.1 ± 1.1; P < 0.01). Regardless of teaching group, students disagreed that they “would have a similar lab experience if they learned 3D scans instead of dissection” (physical = 2.1 ± 0.6; virtual = 2.5 ± 0.8), but agreed that they would use the virtual 3D scans to prepare for the dissection lab and practical/written exam (physical = 4.5 ± 0.8; virtual = 4.9 ± 0.3). This study demonstrates that virtual 3D scans are comparable to physical prosections in anatomy learning, but students do not support this resource replacing the dissection process.

Metrics

14 Record Views

Details

Logo image