Multiple-Choice versus Open-Ended Questions in Advanced Clinical Neuroanatomy: Using a National Neuroanatomy Assessment to Investigate Variability in Performance Using Different Question Types.

Methods of assessment in anatomy vary across medical schools in the United Kingdom (UK) and beyond; common methods include written, spotter, and oral assessment. However, there is limited research evaluating these methods in regards to student performance and perception. The National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition (NUNC) is held annually for medical students throughout the UK. Prior to 2017, the competition asked open-ended questions (OEQ) in the anatomy spotter examination, and in subsequent years also asked single best answer (SBA) questions. The aim of this study is to assess medical students' performance on, and perception of, SBA and OEQ methods of assessment in a spotter style anatomy examination. Student examination performance was compared between OEQ (2013-2016) and SBA (2017-2020) for overall score and each neuroanatomical subtopic. Additionally, a questionnaire explored students' perceptions of SBAs. A total of 631 students attended the NUNC in the studied period. The average mark was significantly higher in SBAs compared to OEQs (60.6% vs. 43.1%, P < 0.0001)-this was true for all neuroanatomical subtopics except the cerebellum. Students felt that they performed better on SBA than OEQs, and diencephalon was felt to be the most difficult neuroanatomical subtopic (n = 38, 34.8%). Students perceived SBA questions to be easier than OEQs and performed significantly better on them in a neuroanatomical spotter examination. Further work is needed to ascertain whether this result is replicable throughout anatomy education.

Introduction of the Modified Neuroanatomy Motivation Questionnaire and Its Role in Comparing Medical Student Attitudes Towards Learning Neuroanatomy Between Neuro-enthusiasts and Standard Students.

BACKGROUND: Neurophobia has been identified as a potential barrier to adequate knowledge of neurology in the medical community, and therefore to patient safety. There is a drive to identify the source of neurophobia, in the hope of tackling it. Comparing the learning motivations of standard medical students with those who enjoy neuroanatomy may be a way of doing this. METHODS: The science motivation questionnaire (SMQ) was modified for neuroanatomy. It was distributed to three cohorts of second year medical students and students attending the extracurricular National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition (NUNC). Cohen's D test for effect size was used to compare standard medical students and those attending the NUNC. RESULTS: Five hundred ninety-seven questionnaires were completed by second year students, and 320 by NUNC attendees. The differences in motivation to learn neuroanatomy between the 2 groups mainly fell into themes of career motivation, personal relevance, intrinsic motivation and assessment anxiety. CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated the use of the SMQ in neuroanatomy, and found differences in motivators to learn neuroanatomy between self-selecting "neurophiles" and standard medical students, mainly relating to intrinsic motivation and its role in their lives. More research is needed to further explore these differences and how they might apply to interventions in medical school curricula.

The Career Impact of the National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition.

BACKGROUND: Neurosurgery is a notoriously difficult career to enter and requires medical students to engage in extracurricular activities to demonstrate their commitment to the specialty. The National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition (NUNC) was established in 2013 as a means for students to display this commitment as well as academic ability. METHODS: A bespoke 22-item questionnaire was designed to determine career outcomes and the role of competition attendance in job applications. It was distributed using the SurveyMonkey website to the 87 attendees at the 2013 and 2014 competitions. RESULTS: Responses were received by 40 competitors (response rate, 46.0%). Twenty-four responders (60.0%) intended to pursue a career in either neurosurgery (n = 18) or neurology (n = 6). This included 10 responders (25.0%) who had successfully entered either neurosurgery (n = 9) or neurology (n = 1). The performance of these 10 was significantly better than the other responders (57.0 ± 13.6% vs. 46.5 ± 13.5% [n = 30]; P = 0.036). Seventeen responders (42.5%) either included their attendance at NUNC in a post-Foundation job application or intend to. CONCLUSIONS: The NUNC provides the opportunity for medical students to demonstrate their interest in neurosurgery. It has the potential to be used as a tool for recognizing medical students suitable for neurosurgery training.

The National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition: Lessons Learned from Partnering with Students to Innovate Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Education.

Undergraduates often perceive neuroscience to be a challenging discipline. As the scope of neuroscience continues to expand, it is important to provide undergraduates with sufficient opportunities to develop their knowledge and skills with the aim of encouraging the future generation of basic and clinical neuroscientists. Through our experience of developing the National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition (NUNC), we have accrued an extensive volume of performance data and subjective insight into the delivery of undergraduate neuroanatomy education, which has the potential to inform how to better engage students within this field. More broadly, our group has implemented a technology enhanced learning platform alongside a peer-assisted teaching program. These achieve the dual purpose of compensating for the reduction in dedicated neuroanatomy teaching hours and encouraging undergraduates to develop an interest in the neurosciences. Here, we consider how improving the learning experience at an undergraduate level encourages further engagement in the neurosciences and the importance of this within the wider neuroscience community.