The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Medical students' learning of anatomy: memorisation, understanding and visualisation
Open accessAbstract
Introduction There is much subjective discussion, but few empirical data that explore how students approach the learning of anatomy. Aims Students' perceptions of successful approaches to learning anatomy were correlated with their own approaches to learning, quality of learning and grades. Methods First‐year medical students ( n = 97) studying anatomy at an Australian university completed an online survey including a version of the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) that measures approaches to learning. The quality of students' written assessment was rated using the Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy. Final examination data were used for correlation with approaches and quality of learning. Results Students perceived successful learning of anatomy as hard work, involving various combinations of memorisation, understanding and visualisation. Students' surface approach (SA) scores (mean 30 ± 3.4) and deep approach (DA) scores (mean 31 ± 4.2) reflected the use of both memorisation and understanding as key learning strategies in anatomy. There were significant correlations between SOLO ratings and DA scores ( r = 0.24, P < 0.01), between SA scores and final grades ( r = − 0.30, P < 0.01) and between SOLO ratings and final grades ( r = 0.61, P < 0.01) in the subject. Conclusions Approaches to learning correlate positively with the quality of learning. Successful learning of anatomy requires a balance between memorisation with understanding and visualisation. Interrelationships between these three strategies for learning anatomy in medicine and other disciplines require further investigation.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
How medical students learn spatial anatomy
Garg, A. X., Norman, G., & Sperotable, L. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03649-7 · Cited by 351
Cited by
The relative effectiveness of computer‐based and traditional resources for education in anatomy
Khot, Z., Quinlan, K., Norman, G. R., & Wainman, B. (2013) · Anatomical Sciences Education · doi:10.1002/ase.1355 · Cited by 274
Ireson, M., Warring, S., Medina-Inojosa, J. R., O’Malley, M. T., Pawlina, W., Lachman, N., Narula, J., & Bhagra, A. (2019) · Annals of Global Health · doi:10.5334/aogh.2565 · Cited by 37
Metadata
- Authors
- Pandey, P., & Zimitat, C.
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-12-12
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 7-14
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W2065011405
- Cited by
- 241
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Medical students' learning of anatomy: memorisation, understanding and visualisation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02643.x
- The paper
- Pandey, P., & Zimitat, C. (2007). Medical students' learning of anatomy: memorisation, understanding and visualisation. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02643.x
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.