Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 233

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dissection laboratory is vital to medical gross anatomy education

Open access
Granger, Noelle A.·2004·The Anatomical Record Part B: The New Anatomist

Abstract

The medical anatomy course has become a complex and complicated educational experience, in which dissection of the human body instructs not only in structure and function, but also in psychosocial areas critical to the development of the whole physician (Dyer and Thorndike, 2000; Gregory and Cole, 2002; Rizzolo, 2002). As the need to teach newer areas (such as molecular biology, cell biology, and medical genetics) has severely compressed the time spent in the dissection laboratory, and a generation of anatomists has reached retirement age without replacement (Marks, 1996; Fitzharris, 1998; Cottam, 1999; Parker, 2002), elimination of dissection is seen as one way to resolve these pressures. Can an anatomy course fulfill its objectives if it no longer includes dissection, using instead two- or three-dimensional virtual representations and computer-assisted learning programs? I would argue that it cannot. I have listed the major reasons why I believe dissection is so important to the learning of anatomy and the creation of the mature physician, gleaned from my own experiences and that of many in the field more eloquent than I, including some of the thoughts of students at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine. Student quotations are taken from e-mails sent to me in response to the Los Angeles Times article “Cutting Out the Cadaver” (Zarembo, 2004). Roman numerals refer to the student's medical school (MS) educational level. Dissection teaches the following: Patients are three-dimensional beings, changing as they age. It is in the dissection laboratory where students form their ideas and mental images of the structure of the human body at different levels over time (Marks, 2000). There is little educational research on how students learn three dimensionally, but it is clear that education on real cadavers allows them to recall this information on demand (Moore, 1998). “Although it is true that much of what we learn in our first 2 years has nothing to do with clinical medicine, dissection does …. The only way to truly know the body is to get up close and personal with it … to feel the tendons and nerves, the fascia and the vessels. There are times when I have to do a femoral stick or an a-line or a central line and I remember the anatomy not from some picture but from what I saw during my own dissection” (MS IV student). The dissection laboratory is the only place where the three-dimensional structure of the human body is reinforced by visual, auditory, and tactile pathways (Mutyala and Cahill, 1996; Aziz et al., 2002). A simulated haptic experience that can adequately replace dissection of the cadaver is not yet available and may not be for many years. “I can't figure out why technology is so often championed as a substitute rather than a supplement in anatomy when, after all, a patient is human—with smells and fluids and all the ‘dirty’ stuff …. When a baby is being delivered in my arms, pointing and clicking on a computer screen will not help me” (MS IV student). The dissection laboratory is the only place where the three-dimensional structure of the human body is reinforced by visual, auditory, and tactile pathways. A simulated haptic experience that can adequately replace dissection of the cadaver is not yet available and may not be for many years. The dissection laboratory provides an introduction to the variability of the human body and the uniqueness of each cadaver. Discussions of variability have been dropped from many of the current textbooks, and lack of this information, or even of an awareness of variability, can lead to misdiagnosis and malpractice (Willan and Humpherson, 1999). “For me, one of the most important lessons I learned in anatomy was that a vast range of structures are considered normal (or at least will never cause dysfunction)” (MS III student). Terminologica anatomica (Federative Committee on Anatomical Terminology, 1998) is the anatomical vocabulary used throughout medical training and practice, and the use of this terminology facilitates a common discourse about anatomy in both healthy and diseased patients (Whitmore, 1999; Rosse, 2001). It is in the dissection laboratory that this vocabulary is acquired and learned, not by rote memorization, but by conceptualization based on what is seen and felt. The routine performance of dissection provides students with training in spatial appreciation and orientation and in the use of instruments. Most of these are directly related to surgery, but the acquired skill in eye-hand coordination and manual dexterity is relevant in a variety of clinical settings (Moore, 1998; Newell, 1999; Ellis, 2001). The normally small dissection groups force students early on in their professional education to communicate effectively, engage in cooperative interaction, and utilize “both self-directed and directed self-learning” (Newell, 1999). This establishes the routine by which they will continue to work, as a part of a medical team in many di

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ar.b.20039

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 233

Metadata

Authors
Granger, N. A.
Venue
The Anatomical Record Part B: The New Anatomist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-11
Volume
281B
Issue
1
Pages
6-8
ISSN
  • 1552-4906 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-4914
OpenAlex
W2063321990
Cited by
233
References
1
FWCI
4.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dissection laboratory is vital to medical gross anatomy education. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ar.b.20039
The paper
Granger, N. A. (2004). Dissection laboratory is vital to medical gross anatomy education. The Anatomical Record Part B: The New Anatomist. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.b.20039

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.