Technology enhanced neuroanatomy teaching techniques: A focused BEME systematic review of current evidence: BEME Guide No. 75

Abstract Background In response to growing curriculum pressures and reduced time dedicated to teaching anatomy, research has been conducted into developing innovative teaching techniques. This raises important questions for neuroanatomy education regarding which teaching techniques are most beneficial for knowledge acquisition and long-term retention, and how they are best implemented. This focused systematic review aims to provide a review of technology-enhanced teaching methods available to neuroanatomy educators, particularly in knowledge acquisition and long-term retention, compared to traditional didactic techniques, and proposes reasons for why they work in some contexts. Methods Electronic databases were searched from January 2015 to June 2020 with keywords that included combinations of ‘neuroanatomy,’ ‘technology,’ ‘teaching,’ and ‘effectiveness’ combined with Boolean phrases ‘AND’ and ‘OR.’ The contexts and outcomes for all studies were summarised while coding, and theories for why particular interventions worked were discussed. Results There were 4287 articles identified for screening, with 13 studies included for final analysis. There were four technologies of interest: stereoscopic views of videos, stereoscopic views of images, augmented reality (AR), and virtual reality (VR). No recommendation for a particular teaching method was made in six studies (46%) while recommendations (from weak to moderate) were made in seven studies (54%). There was weak to moderate evidence for the efficacy of stereoscopic images and AR, and no difference in the use of stereoscopic videos or VR compared to controls. Conclusions To date, technology-enhanced teaching is not inferior to teaching by conventional didactic methods. There are promising results for these methods in complex spatial anatomy and reducing cognitive load. Possible reasons for why interventions worked were described including students’ engagement with the object, cognitive load theory, complex spatial relationships, and the technology learning curve. Future research may build on the theorised explanations proposed here and develop and test innovative technologies that build on prior research.

[1]  Y. Que,et al.  A class III WRKY transcription factor in sugarcane was involved in biotic and abiotic stress responses , 2020, Scientific Reports.

[2]  B. Daniel,et al.  A Randomised Control Trial and Comparative Analysis of Multi-Dimensional Learning Tools in Anatomy , 2020, Scientific Reports.

[3]  A. Kahn,et al.  Does 3D stereoscopy support anatomical education? , 2020, Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy.

[4]  J. Kooloos,et al.  Neuroanatomy Learning: Augmented Reality vs. Cross‐Sections , 2019, Anatomical sciences education.

[5]  M. Gordon,et al.  Twelve tips for undertaking a focused systematic review in medical education , 2018, Medical teacher.

[6]  M. Ferreira,et al.  Tools and resources for neuroanatomy education: a systematic review , 2018, BMC medical education.

[7]  Christa Boer,et al.  Correlation Coefficients: Appropriate Use and Interpretation , 2018, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[8]  Chelsea Ekstrand,et al.  Immersive and interactive virtual reality to improve learning and retention of neuroanatomy in medical students: a randomized controlled study. , 2018, CMAJ open.

[9]  Darrin J. Lee,et al.  Effect of Stereoscopic Anaglyphic 3-Dimensional Video Didactics on Learning Neuroanatomy. , 2017, World neurosurgery.

[10]  Zane Stromberga,et al.  The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy , 2017, Anatomical sciences education.

[11]  A. Iloreta,et al.  Immersive virtual reality as a teaching tool for neuroanatomy , 2017, International forum of allergy & rhinology.

[12]  N. Stomski,et al.  The influence of anatomy app use on chiropractic students’ learning outcomes: a randomised controlled trial , 2016, Chiropractic & Manual Therapies.

[13]  Sevda Küçük,et al.  Learning anatomy via mobile augmented reality: Effects on achievement and cognitive load , 2016, Anatomical sciences education.

[14]  W. Couldwell,et al.  The Rhoton Collection. , 2016, World neurosurgery.

[15]  Manoel Jacobsen Teixeira,et al.  Virtual and stereoscopic anatomy: when virtual reality meets medical education. , 2016, Journal of neurosurgery.

[16]  Annette Kratcoski,et al.  Using stereoscopy to teach complex biological concepts. , 2015, Advances in physiology education.

[17]  Christina Amaxopoulou,et al.  Stereoscopic neuroanatomy lectures using a three-dimensional virtual reality environment. , 2015, Annals of anatomy = Anatomischer Anzeiger : official organ of the Anatomische Gesellschaft.

[18]  O. Plaisant,et al.  A core syllabus for the teaching of neuroanatomy to medical students , 2015, Clinical anatomy.

[19]  Justin W. Adams,et al.  The production of anatomical teaching resources using three‐dimensional (3D) printing technology , 2014, Anatomical sciences education.

[20]  Logan Fiorella,et al.  Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning: Coherence, Signaling, Redundancy, Spatial Contiguity and Temporal Contiguity Principles. , 2014 .

[21]  Noor Christoph,et al.  Augmented reality in medical education? , 2014, Perspectives on Medical Education.

[22]  Blair MacIntyre,et al.  A psychological perspective on augmented reality in the mathematics classroom , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[23]  D. Keegan,et al.  Three Types of Interaction , 2013 .

[24]  Jyh-Chong Liang,et al.  Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[25]  Gallayanee Yaoyuneyong,et al.  Augmented Reality: An Overview and Five Directions for AR in Education , 2011 .

[26]  J. Sterne,et al.  The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[27]  Robert T Held,et al.  A guide to stereoscopic 3D displays in medicine. , 2011, Academic radiology.

[28]  Kristen A. Lindgren,et al.  A novel three‐dimensional tool for teaching human neuroanatomy , 2010, Anatomical sciences education.

[29]  Louise D McCullough,et al.  Attitudes of US medical trainees towards neurology education: "Neurophobia" - a global issue , 2010, BMC medical education.

[30]  D. McAndrew,et al.  Review of anatomy education in Australian and New Zealand medical schools , 2010, ANZ journal of surgery.

[31]  James Giles,et al.  Clinical neuroscience attachments: a student’s view of ‘neurophobia’ , 2010, The clinical teacher.

[32]  Amy Hilbelink,et al.  A measure of the effectiveness of incorporating 3D human anatomy into an online undergraduate laboratory , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[33]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement , 2009, PloS one.

[34]  Cheryl I. Johnson,et al.  Revising the Redundancy Principle in Multimedia Learning. , 2008 .

[35]  H. Schmidt,et al.  Description, justification and clarification: a framework for classifying the purposes of research in medical education , 2008, Medical education.

[36]  B. McKinstry,et al.  The effectiveness of self-assessment on the identification of learner needs, learner activity, and impact on clinical practice: BEME Guide no. 10 , 2008, Medical teacher.

[37]  G. Norman,et al.  Virtual reality and brain anatomy: a randomised trial of e‐learning instructional designs , 2007, Medical education.

[38]  M. Stuart,et al.  Survey of clinicians' attitudes to the anatomical teaching and knowledge of medical students , 2005, Clinical anatomy.

[39]  H. van Mameren,et al.  Do students have sufficient knowledge of clinical anatomy? , 2005, Medical education.

[40]  P. McKeown,et al.  The impact of curricular change on medical students' knowledge of anatomy , 2003, Medical education.

[41]  Richard Lowe,et al.  Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics , 2003 .

[42]  F. Schon,et al.  Is clinical neurology really so difficult? , 2002, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[43]  R. Józefowicz.  Neurophobia: the fear of neurology among medical students. , 1994, Archives of neurology.

[44]  D. Proffitt,et al.  Understanding wheel dynamics , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[45]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[46]  R. Shepard,et al.  Mental Rotation of Three-Dimensional Objects , 1971, Science.

[47]  M. Abkemeier.  Cognitive Load Theory , 2020, Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies.

[48]  M. Sotgiu,et al.  Neuroanatomy, the Achille’s Heel of Medical Students. A Systematic Analysis of Educational Strategies for the Teaching of Neuroanatomy , 2019, Anatomical sciences education.

[49]  Kevin Ashford-Rowe,et al.  EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: 2019 Higher Education Edition. , 2019 .

[50]  Matthew Hackett,et al.  Assessing Performance and Usability of 3D Visualization Technologies for Anatomical Training , 2018 .

[51]  T. D. Wilson,et al.  Evaluation of the effectiveness of 3D vascular stereoscopic models in anatomy instruction for first year medical students , 2017, Anatomical sciences education.

[52]  M. Malbrán.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning , 2007 .

[53]  Mark C Preul,et al.  Interactive stereoscopic virtual reality: a new tool for neurosurgical education. Technical note. , 2002, Journal of neurosurgery.

[54]  Ian Mugridge.  Growth and Structure of Distance Education , 1987 .