Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 159

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Analysis of traditional versus three‐dimensional augmented curriculum on anatomical learning outcome measures

Peterson, Diana Coomes, Mlynarczyk, Gregory S.A.·2016·Anatomical Sciences Education

Abstract

This study examined whether student learning outcome measures are influenced by the addition of three‐dimensional and digital teaching tools to a traditional dissection and lecture learning format curricula. The study was performed in a semester long graduate level course that incorporated both gross anatomy and neuroanatomy curricula. Methods compared student examination performance on material taught using lecture and cadaveric dissection teaching tools alone or lecture and cadaveric dissection augmented with computerized three‐dimensional teaching tools. Additional analyses were performed to examine potential correlations between question difficulty and format, previous student performance (i.e., undergraduate grade point average), and a student perception survey. The results indicated that students performed better on material in which three–dimensional (3D) technologies are utilized in conjunction with lecture and dissection methodologies. The improvement in performance was observed across the student population primarily on laboratory examinations. Although, student performance was increased, students did not perceive that the use of the additional 3D technology significantly influenced their learning. The results indicate that the addition of 3D learning tools can influence long‐term retention of gross anatomy material and should be considered as a beneficial supplement for anatomy courses. Anat Sci Educ 9: 529–536. © 2016 American Association of Anatomists.

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/ase.1612

Cites

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 159

Metadata

Authors
Peterson, D. C., & Mlynarczyk, G. S. A.
Venue
Anatomical Sciences Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-04-14
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
529-536
ISSN
  • 1935-9772 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-9780
OpenAlex
W2345403589
Cited by
159
References
0
FWCI
6.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Analysis of traditional versus three‐dimensional augmented curriculum on anatomical learning outcome measures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ase.1612
The paper
Peterson, D. C., & Mlynarczyk, G. S. A. (2016). Analysis of traditional versus three‐dimensional augmented curriculum on anatomical learning outcome measures. Anatomical Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1612

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.