BACKGROUND: Past research in medical education has addressed the study of gross anatomy, including the most effective learning techniques, comparing the use of cadavers, dissection, anatomy atlases, and multimedia tools. The aim of this study was to demonstrate similarities and differences among American, Asian, and European medical students (MS) regarding different study methods and to see how these methods affected their clinical skills. METHODS: To analyze the varying study methods of European, American, and Asian MS in our program and in order to elucidate any ethnic and cultural differences a survey was conducted. A total of 705 international MS, from the Polish (PD), American (AD), and Taiwanese (TD) divisions, were asked to voluntarily participate in the questionnaire. Students were asked the following questions: which methods they used to study anatomy, and which of the methods they believed were most efficient for comprehension, memorization, and review. The questions were based on a 5-point Likert scale, where 5 was 'strongly agree', and 1 was 'strongly disagree'. RESULTS: The PD and AD preferred the use of dissections and prosected specimens to study anatomy. The TD showed less interest in studying from prosected specimens, but did acknowledge that this method was more effective than using atlases, plastic models, or CD-ROMs. Multimedia tools were mainly used for radiological anatomy and review and also for correctly typing proper names of structures using exact anatomical terminology. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the differences in study techniques among students from different ethnic backgrounds. The study approaches used in order to accomplish learning objectives was affected by cultural norms that influenced each student group. These differences may be rooted in technological, religious, and language barriers, which can shape the way MS approach learning.
BACKGROUND: Past research in medical education has addressed the study of gross anatomy, including the most effective learning techniques, comparing the use of cadavers, dissection, anatomy atlases, and multimedia tools. The aim of this study was to demonstrate similarities and differences among American, Asian, and European medical students (MS) regarding different study methods and to see how these methods affected their clinical skills. METHODS: To analyze the varying study methods of European, American, and Asian MS in our program and in order to elucidate any ethnic and cultural differences a survey was conducted. A total of 705 international MS, from the Polish (PD), American (AD), and Taiwanese (TD) divisions, were asked to voluntarily participate in the questionnaire. Students were asked the following questions: which methods they used to study anatomy, and which of the methods they believed were most efficient for comprehension, memorization, and review. The questions were based on a 5-point Likert scale, where 5 was 'strongly agree', and 1 was 'strongly disagree'. RESULTS: The PD and AD preferred the use of dissections and prosected specimens to study anatomy. The TD showed less interest in studying from prosected specimens, but did acknowledge that this method was more effective than using atlases, plastic models, or CD-ROMs. Multimedia tools were mainly used for radiological anatomy and review and also for correctly typing proper names of structures using exact anatomical terminology. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the differences in study techniques among students from different ethnic backgrounds. The study approaches used in order to accomplish learning objectives was affected by cultural norms that influenced each student group. These differences may be rooted in technological, religious, and language barriers, which can shape the way MS approach learning.