Literature DB >> 33687489

The practical examination types (spot test and slide test) of gross anatomy course in faculty of medicine: a simultaneous evaluation of the aspect of student success.

Kemal Emre Özen1, Kübra Erdoğan2, Burhan Yarar3, Gizem Çizmeci2, Gonca Ay Keselik2, Ferhan Elmalı4, Mehmet Ali Malas2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the students' scores of the spot (spotter/classical/traditional/tag/ring/bell-ringer) test (3D environment) performed in the laboratory with the slide test (gross anatomy images) (2D environment) in the class. The observation of our department regarding both types for practical examination was reported, in terms of exam marks of the students. Both are preferred as the practical examination types for gross anatomy course our in medical faculty.
METHODS: The 29 blocks' scores in 5 years (2013/2014-2017/2018) belonging to first- and second-year medical students' spot tests and slide tests are evaluated retrospectively and statistically compared. Correlations of the spot tests and the slide tests, besides the correlations between theoretical examinations and the practical examination types, are calculated.
RESULTS: Spot test scores were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in nine blocks, while slide test scores were higher significantly (p < 0.05) in fourteen. There was no statistically significant difference between the practical examination types (spot/slide) in six blocks. There were correlations between the spot test and the slide test in all blocks (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: It is considered that the spot test reflects the success/ability in a 3D environment, while the slide test reflects it in the 2D environment. In conclusion, neither of these two types of examinations stands out absolutely. Both types of examinations have their own features in areas, such as assessment power, applicability, and effect on success.

Keywords:  Anatomy education; Anatomy practical examination; Educational assessment; Educational measurement; Slide test; Spot test

Year:  2021        PMID: 33687489     DOI: 10.1007/s00276-021-02726-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat        ISSN: 0930-1038            Impact factor:   1.246


  21 in total

1.  How medical students learn spatial anatomy.

Authors:  A X Garg; G Norman; L Sperotable
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-02-03       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Setting standards on educational tests.

Authors:  John J Norcini
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.251

3.  Teaching anatomy: cadavers vs. computers?

Authors:  Susana Norma Biasutto; Lucas Ignacio Caussa; Luis Esteban Criado del Río
Journal:  Ann Anat       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.698

4.  Anatomy practical examinations: how does student performance on computerized evaluation compare with the traditional format?

Authors:  Ibrahim Muhammad Inuwa; Varna Taranikanti; Maimouna Al-Rawahy; Omar Habbal
Journal:  Anat Sci Educ       Date:  2011-09-13       Impact factor: 5.958

5.  Associations between formative practice quizzes and summative examination outcomes in a medical anatomy course.

Authors:  John A McNulty; Baltazar R Espiritu; Amy E Hoyt; David C Ensminger; Arcot J Chandrasekhar
Journal:  Anat Sci Educ       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 5.958

6.  Evaluation of a gross anatomy program without dissection.

Authors:  N A Jones; R P Olafson; J Sutin
Journal:  J Med Educ       Date:  1978-03

7.  Humanities in medical education: rationale and resources for the dissection laboratory.

Authors:  S L Bertman; S C Marks
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1985-09       Impact factor: 6.251

8.  The effect of assessments and examinations on the learning of medical students.

Authors:  D I Newble; K Jaeger
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 6.251

9.  Anatomy Learning from Prosected Cadaveric Specimens Versus Plastic Models: A Comparative Study of Upper Limb Anatomy.

Authors:  Vasileios Mitrousias; Theofilos S Karachalios; Sokratis E Varitimidis; Konstantinos Natsis; Dimitrios L Arvanitis; Aristeidis H Zibis
Journal:  Anat Sci Educ       Date:  2019-07-23       Impact factor: 5.958

10.  Development and assessment of a new 3D neuroanatomy teaching tool for MRI training.

Authors:  Zachary A Drapkin; Kristen A Lindgren; Michael J Lopez; Maureen E Stabio
Journal:  Anat Sci Educ       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 5.958

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.