Identifying validity evidence for uncertainty tolerance scales: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Uncertainty tolerance (UT) is increasingly valued as a medical graduate attribute and broadly measured among medical student populations. However, the validity evidence underpinning UT scale implementation has not been summarised across studies. The present work evaluates UT scale validity evidence to better inform when, why and how UT scales ought to be used and to identify remaining validity evidence gaps. METHODS: A literature search for psychometric studies of UT scales was completed in 2022. Records were included if they implemented one of the four most cited UT scales (i.e. Physicians' Reactions to Uncertainty scale 1990 [PRU1990] or 1995 [PRU1995], Tolerance for Ambiguity [TFA] scale or Tolerance of Ambiguity in Medical Students and Doctors scale [TAMSAD]) in a population of physicians and/or medial students and presented validity evidence according to the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing framework. Included studies were rated and analysed according to evidence for test content, response processes, internal structure, relations to other variables and consequences of testing. RESULTS: Among the investigated scales, 'relations to other variables' and 'internal structure' were the most commonly reported forms of validity evidence. No evidence of 'response processes' or 'consequences of testing' was identified. Overall, the PRU1990 and PRU1995 demonstrated the strongest validity evidence, although evidence primarily related to physician populations. CONCLUSIONS: None of the studied scales demonstrated evidence for all five sources of validity. Future research would benefit from assessing validity evidence for 'response processes' and 'consequences of testing' among physicians and medical students at different training/career stages to better understand UT construct conceptualisation in these populations. Until further and stronger validity evidence for UT scales is established, we caution against implementing UT scales outside of research settings (e.g. for higher stakes decision making).

A review of U.S. Medical schools' promotion standards for educational excellence.

Phenomenon: Given the growing number of medical science educators, an examination of institutions' promotion criteria related to educational excellence and scholarship is timely. This study investigates the extent to which medical schools' promotion criteria align with published standards for documenting and evaluating educational activities. Approach: This document analysis systematically analyzed promotion and tenure (P&T) guidelines from U.S. medical schools. Criteria and promotion expectations (related to context, quantity, quality, and engagement) were explored across five educational domains including: (i) teaching, (ii) curriculum/program development, (iii) mentoring/advising, (iv) educational leadership/administration, and (v) educational measurement and evaluation, in addition to research/scholarship and service. After independent review and data extraction, paired researchers compared findings and reached consensus on all discrepancies prior to final data submission. Descriptive statistics assessed the frequency of referenced promotion criteria. Findings: Promotion-related documents were retrieved from 120 (of 185) allopathic and osteopathic U.S. medical schools. Less than half of schools (43%; 52 of 120) documented a well-defined education-related pathway for advancement in academic rank. Across five education-specific domains, only 24% (12 of 50) of the investigated criteria were referenced by at least half of the schools. The least represented domain within P&T documents was "Educational Measurement and Evaluation." P&T documents for 47% of schools were rated as "below average" or "very vague" in their clarity/specificity. Insights: Less than 10% of U.S. medical schools have thoroughly embraced published recommendations for documenting and evaluating educational excellence. This raises concern for medical educators who may be evaluated for promotion based on vague or incomplete promotion criteria. With greater awareness of how educational excellence is currently documented and how promotion criteria can be improved, education-focused faculty can better recognize gaps in their own documentation practices, and more schools may be encouraged to embrace change and align with published recommendations.

Associations between professional development benefits and PA career satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated how professional development benefits offered by employers directly correlate to self-perceptions of leadership potential, committee involvement, and career satisfaction among physician assistants (PAs). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the 2015 AAPA National Survey and 2016 AAPA Salary Survey explored the associations between the aforementioned variables. Bivariate correlations were used to evaluate the associations between variables. RESULTS: Self-perceived leadership attributes were found to be mildly and positively correlated with the number of committees a PA was involved in (P < .001; correlation coefficient (CC) = 0.245). Of the investigated factors, only leadership potential was significantly correlated with career satisfaction (P ≤ .001; CC = 0.059). The proportion of professional development fees, memberships, and expenses covered by employers had no bearing on career satisfaction (P = .438). CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of the benefits received, PAs were satisfied with their careers. Intrinsic rewards may have a greater positive association with career satisfaction than extrinsic benefits alone.

Closing a window - opening a door: A response to the letter to the editor.

In this response, the authors of "A meta-analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies" (Wilson, 2018) make counter arguments to a letter submitted to the editor while encouraging academicians to consider a more modern perspective of anatomy education in the context of changing curricular models. While the authors agree the dissection laboratory is fertile ground for cultivating professional skill development, in more modern settings there are a myriad of outlets and experiences through which trainees can gain the necessary exposure to the same professional skills which are often touted as being informally developed in the anatomy laboratory. Overall, the authors advocate for closing the window on evaluating short-term anatomy knowledge outcomes so that the door can be opened to evaluating the effects of dissection on long-term knowledge gains and determining whether there are irreplaceable teaching advantages within hidden/informal curricula in the anatomy laboratory. Clin. Anat. 31:1207-1209, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

A meta-analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies.

The debate regarding anatomy laboratory teaching approaches is ongoing and controversial. To date, the literature has yielded only speculative conclusions because of general methodological weaknesses and a lack of summative empirical evidence. Through a meta-analysis, this study compared the effectiveness of instructional laboratory approaches used in anatomy education to objectively and more conclusively synthesize the existing literature. Studies published between January 1965 and December 2015 were searched through five databases. Titles and abstracts of the retrieved records were screened using eligibility criteria to determine their appropriateness for study inclusion. Only numerical data were extracted for analysis. A summary effect size was estimated to determine the effects of laboratory pedagogies on learner performance and perceptions data were compiled to provide additional context. Of the 3,035 records screened, 327 underwent full-text review. Twenty-seven studies, comprising a total of 7,731 participants, were included in the analysis. The meta-analysis detected no effect (standardized mean difference = -0.03; 95% CI = -0.16 to 0.10; P = 0.62) on learner performance. Additionally, a moderator analysis detected no effects (P ≥ 0.16) for study design, learner population, intervention length, or specimen type. Across studies, student performance on knowledge examinations was equivalent regardless of being exposed to either dissection or another laboratory instructional strategy. This was true of every comparison investigated (i.e., dissection vs. prosection, dissection vs. digital media, dissection vs. models/modeling, and dissection vs. hybrid). In the context of short-term knowledge gains alone, dissection is no better, and no worse, than alternative instructional modalities. Clin. Anat. 31:122-133, 2018. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Meta-analysis and review of learner performance and preference: virtual versus optical microscopy.

CONTEXT: Over nearly two decades, a wealth of literature describing the various capabilities, uses and adaptations of virtual microscopy (VM) has been published. Many studies have investigated the effects on and benefits to student learning of VM compared with optical microscopy (OM). OBJECTIVES: This study statistically aggregated the findings of multiple comparative studies through a meta-analysis in order to summarise and substantiate the pedagogical efficacy of teaching with VM. METHODS: Using predefined eligibility criteria, teams of paired researchers screened the titles and abstracts of VM studies retrieved from seven different databases. After two rounds of screening, numerical and thematic data were extracted from the eligible studies for analysis. A summary effect size and estimate of heterogeneity were calculated to determine the effects of VM on learner performance and the amount of variance between studies, respectively. Trends in student perceptions were also analysed and reported. RESULTS: Of the 725 records screened, 72 studies underwent full-text review. In total, 12 studies were viable for meta-analysis and additional studies were reviewed to extract themes relating to learners' perceptions of VM. The meta-analysis detected a small yet significant positive effect on learner performance (standardised mean difference 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.47; p = 0.003), indicating that learners experience marked knowledge gains when exposed to VM over OM. Variation among studies was evident as high heterogeneity was reported. An analysis of trends in learner perceptions noted that respondents favoured VM over OM by a large margin. CONCLUSIONS: Although many individual studies have reported non-significant findings in comparisons of VM and OM, the enhanced power afforded by meta-analysis revealed that the pedagogical approach of VM is modestly superior to that of OM and is preferred by learners.

Analyzing script concordance test scoring methods and items by difficulty and type.

BACKGROUND: A battery of various psychometric assessments has been conducted on script concordance tests (SCTs) that are purported to measure data interpretation, an essential component of clinical reasoning. Although the breadth of published SCT research is broad, best practice controversies and evidentiary gaps remain. PURPOSES: In this study, SCT data were used to test the psychometric properties of 6 scoring methods. In addition, this study explored whether SCT items clustered by difficulty and type were able to discriminate between medical training levels. METHODS: SCT scores from a problem-solving SCT (SCT-PS; n = 522) and emergency medicine SCT (SCT-EM; n = 1,040) were collected at a large institution of medicine. Item analyses were performed to optimize each dataset. Items were categorized into difficulty levels and organized into types. Correlational analyses, one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), and one-way ANOVA were conducted to explore study aims. RESULTS: All 6 scoring methods differentiated between training levels. Longitudinal analysis of SCT-PS data reported that MS4s significantly (p < .001) outperformed their scores as MS2s in all difficulty categories. Cross-sectional analysis of SCT-EM data reported significant differences (p < .001) between experienced EM physicians, EM residents, and MS4s at each level of difficulty. Items categorized by type were also able to detect training level disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 6 scoring methods, 5-point scoring solutions generated more reliable measures of data interpretation than 3-point scoring methods. Data interpretation abilities were a function of experience at every level of item difficulty. Items categorized by type exhibited discriminatory power providing modest evidence toward the construct validity of SCTs.

Faith and facts: Exploring the intersection of religion and science among anatomy educators.

The intersection of religion and science often elicits polarizing views among scientists, though approximately half of American scientists identify as religious. Mounting evidence also supports the role of spirituality in comprehensive patient care. The purpose of this study was to explore the religiosity of faculty who teach in the anatomical sciences at U.S. colleges and universities. Surveys were administered to anatomists through two professional societies. Two-thirds (64.9%, 74/114) of respondents identified as religious, 26.3% (30/114) as atheist, and 8.8% (10/114) as agnostic. Most respondents (64.9%, 74/114) disagreed with the statement, "There is no place for religion and science to intersect." Approximately one in three respondents expressed concern that sharing/disclosing their religious beliefs would negatively affect the perceptions of colleagues (32.5%, 37/114) and students (28.9%, 33/114) toward them. Faculty at faith-based institutions were more open to disclosing their beliefs (p = 0.045), and highly religious individuals were more concerned (p = 0.001). Fewer than one-fifth of respondents 17.5% (20/114) personally experienced mistreatment or discrimination within academic settings due to their religious beliefs. Most respondents held politically liberal-leaning views (71.0%, 76/107). Highly religious individuals were more likely to be politically conservative (p < 0.001). Overall, this study demonstrates that the number of anatomists who identify as religious may be higher than that of other biological disciplines and that mistreatment due to religious views remains a challenge for some in the profession. Continued dialogue regarding the role of religion in professional identity expression may be an important step in mitigating religion-focused mistreatment and discrimination in academic settings.

Anatomy's missing faces: An assessment of representation gaps in atlas and textbook imagery.

Previous research suggests that underrepresentation in medical curricula perpetuates inequities in healthcare. This study aimed to quantify the prevalence of human phenotypic diversity (e.g., skin tone, sex, body size, and age) across 11 commonly used anatomy atlases and textbooks in pre-clerkship medical education, published from 2015 to 2020. A systematic visual content analysis was conducted on 5001 images in which at least one phenotypic attribute was quantifiable. Anatomy images most prevalently portrayed light skin tones, males, persons with intermediate body sizes, and young to middle-aged adults. Of the 3883 images in which there was a codable skin tone, 81.2% (n = 3154) depicted light, 14.3% (n = 554) depicted intermediate, and 4.5% (n = 175) depicted dark skin tones. Of the 2384 images that could be categorized into a sex binary, 38.4% (n = 915) depicted females and 61.6% (n = 1469) depicted males. A male bias persisted across all whole-body and regional-body images, including those showing sex organs or those showing characteristics commonly associated with a specific sex (e.g. for males, facial hair and/or muscle hypertrophy). Within sex-specific contexts, darker skin was underrepresented, but male depictions displayed greater overall skin tone variation. Although most images could not be assigned to a body size or age category, when codable, these images overwhelmingly depicted adults (85.0%; 482 of 567) with smaller (34.7%; 93 of 268) or intermediate (64.6%; 173 of 268) body sizes. Ultimately, these outcomes provide reference metrics for monitoring ongoing and future efforts to address representation inequalities portrayed in anatomical imagery.

Employment benefits across U.S. allopathic medical schools: National norms and relationships with institutional wealth.

This study summarizes employment benefits from across 155 U.S. allopathic medical schools, investigates differences in employment benefits according to institutional characteristics, and explores possible connections between employment benefits and institutional wealth. Employment benefits data were extracted from institutions' websites across four categories: time-off, time-away, retirement contributions, and Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs)/family benefits. This dataset was mixed with other publicly available datasets sourced through the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), the American Council on Education (ACE), and the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) to conduct additional analyses. Nationally, medical schools offered an average of 31 vacation/sick days and 12 paid holidays. Schools typically offered 4 out of 8 time-away benefits. Employers' retirement contributions ranged from 3.0% to 15.5%, with a mean contribution of 8.5%. A total of 43.2% (67 of 155) of medical schools offered a pension. Collectively, private medical schools offered fewer time-away benefits and more EAP/family benefits compared to public schools. Universities with larger endowments per student were associated with a higher number of EAP/family benefits offerings (r = 0.543, p < 0.001). Institutional wealth did not influence other benefits offerings. The quantity/quality of most employment benefits offered at allopathic medical schools were wide-ranging, tended not to vary by region or school control, and were not a function of institutional wealth.

Survey response rates in health sciences education research: A 10-year meta-analysis.

Growth in the online survey market may be increasing response burden and possibly jeopardizing higher response rates. This meta-analysis evaluated survey trends over one decade (2011-2020) to determine: (1) changes in survey publication rates over time, (2) changes in response rates over time, (3) typical response rates within health sciences education research, (4) the factors influencing survey completion levels, and (5) common gaps in survey methods and outcomes reporting. Study I estimated survey publication trends between 2011 and 2020 using articles published in the top three health sciences education research journals. Study II searched the anatomical sciences education literature across six databases and extracted study/survey features and survey response rates. Time plots and a proportional meta-analysis were performed. Per 2926 research articles, the annual estimated proportion of studies with survey methodologies has remained constant, with no linear trend (p > 0.050) over time (Study I). Study II reported a pooled absolute response rate of 67% (95% CI = 63.9-69.0) across 360 studies (k), totaling 115,526 distributed surveys. Despite response rate oscillations over time, no significant linear trend (p = 0.995) was detected. Neither survey length, incentives, sponsorship, nor population type affected absolute response rates (p ≥ 0.070). Only 35% (120 of 339) of studies utilizing a Likert scale reported evidence of survey validity. Survey response rates and the prevalence of studies with survey methodologies have remained stable with no linear trends over time. We recommend researchers strive for a typical absolute response rate of 67% or higher and clearly document evidence of survey validity for empirical studies.

Pulling back the curtain: Exploring norms and practices among a sample of anatomy-related departments in U.S. medical schools.

Anatomy-related departments have access to comparative research productivity data (e.g., Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research), yet no datasets exist for comparing departments' general practices pertinent to education-focused faculty. Practice trends in anatomy-related departments across U.S. medical schools were explored by surveying departmental leaders. The survey inquired about: (i) faculty time allocations, (ii) anatomy teaching services, (iii) faculty labor distribution models, and (iv) faculty compensation practices. A nationally representative sample of 35 departments (of 194) responded to the survey. On average, anatomy educators are allotted 24% (median = 15%) protected time for research, irrespective of funding, 62% for teaching and course administration (median = 68%), 12% for service, and 2% for administration. Forty-four percent (15 of 34) of departments taught at least five different student populations, often across multiple colleges. Many departments (65%; 11 of 17) applied formulaic methods for determining faculty workloads, often as a function of course credits or contact hours. Average base salaries for assistant and associate professors reported by this survey were consistent (p ≥ 0.056) with national means (i.e., Association of American Medical Colleges Annual Faculty Salary Report). Merit-based increases and bonuses averaged 5% and 10% of faculty's salaries, respectively, when awarded. Cost-of-living increases averaged 3%. Overall, departments' workload and compensation practices vary widely, likely a consequence of different institutional cultures, locations, needs, and financial priorities. This sample dataset allows anatomy-related departments to compare and reflect upon their practices and competitiveness in recruiting and retaining faculty.

Could the altmetrics wave bring a flood of confusion for anatomists?

Altmetrics are non-traditional metrics that can capture downloads, social media shares, and other modern measures of research impact and reach. Despite most of the altmetrics literature focusing on evaluating the relationship between research outputs and academic impact/influence, the perceived and actual value of altmetrics among academicians remains nebulous and inconsistent. This work proposes that ambiguities surrounding the value and use of altmetrics may be explained by a multiplicity of altmetrics definitions communicated by journal publishers. A root cause analysis was initiated to compare altmetrics definitions between anatomy and medical education journal publishers' websites and to determine the comparability of the measurement and platform sources used for computing altmetrics values. A scoping content analysis of data from across eight publishers' websites revealed wide variability in definitions and heterogeneity among altmetrics measurement sources. The incongruencies among publishers' altmetrics definitions and their value demonstrate that publishers may be one of the root cause of ambiguity perpetuating confusion around the value and use of altmetrics. This review highlights the need to more deeply explore the root causes of altmetrics ambiguities within academia and makes a compelling argument for establishing a ubiquitous altmetrics definition that is concise, clear, and specific.

Faculty retirements will likely exacerbate the anatomy educator shortage.

Medical education has reported a shortage of anatomy educators since the 1960s. While the faculty pipeline has recently been explored, insights into retirement intentions, a key driver of faculty turnover, have yet to be investigated. With the mean age of anatomists rising, knowledge of retirement intentions among current educators is essential to understanding the anatomy educator shortage. This study explored the retirement intentions of current anatomy educators and their likely effects on the workforce. Surveys were distributed to department heads and the American Association for Anatomy (AAA) membership to inquire about job postings from 2018-2020 and retirement intentions, respectively. Department heads sought to fill open positions due to faculty retirements (36%, 15 of 42), faculty relocations/sabbaticals/new responsibilities (31%), and brand new positions (24%). The retirement intentions survey revealed that 61% (23 of 38) of faculty '55 and older' intend to retire within five years. Based on the extrapolation of AAA membership data, estimates suggest that almost twice as many anatomy faculty could retire per year (n = 40) over the next five years compared to the estimated number of annual PhD graduates (n = 22) likely to enter the workforce. Factors driving retirement intentions were overwhelmingly age and finances, followed by job satisfaction and family. The creation of new anatomy educator positions to address increased student enrollments and new health sciences programs is likely to place even greater strain on workforce demands.

Reliability of Uncertainty Tolerance Scales Implemented Among Physicians and Medical Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Uncertainty tolerance (UT) is a construct describing individuals' perceptions of, and responses to, uncertainty across their cognition, emotion, and behavior. Various UT scales have been designed for physician and medical student populations. However, links between UT and other variables (e.g., training stages) are inconsistent, raising concerns about scale reliability and validity. As reliability is a precondition for validity, a necessary first step in assessing UT scales' efficacy is evaluating their reliability. Accordingly, the authors conducted a meta-analysis of the reliability of UT scales designed for, and implemented among, physician and medical student populations. METHOD: In 2020, the authors searched 4 electronic databases alongside a citation search of previously identified UT scales. They included English-language, peer-reviewed studies that implemented UT scales in physician and/or medical student populations and reported reliability evidence. A meta-analysis of studies' Cronbach's alphas evaluated aggregated internal consistency across studies; subgroup analyses evaluated UT scales by named scale, population, and item characteristics. RESULTS: Among 4,124 records screened, 35 studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting 75 Cronbach's alphas. Four UT scales appeared in at least 3 included studies: Physicians' Reactions to Uncertainty scale 1990 (PRU1990) and 1995 (PRU1995) versions, Tolerance for Ambiguity scale (TFA), and Tolerance of Ambiguity in Medical Students and Doctors scale (TAMSAD). The scores from these scales ranged in reliability from very good (PRU1990: 0.832, PRU1995: 0.818) to respectable (TFA: 0.761, TAMSAD: 0.711). Aggregated internal consistency was significantly higher ( P < .001) among physicians (0.797) than medical students (0.711). CONCLUSIONS: UT scales generally demonstrated respectable internal consistency when administered among physicians and medical students, yet the reliability among medical students was significantly lower. The authors caution against using UT scores for decision-making purposes (e.g., applicant selection, program evaluation), especially among medical student populations. Future research should explore the reasons underlying these observed population differences.

An investigation of alternating group dissections in medical gross anatomy.

BACKGROUND: Reduction in contact hours has led to the use of more efficient teaching approaches in medical education, yet the efficacy of such approaches is often not fully investigated. PURPOSE: This work provides a detailed analysis of alternating group dissections with peer-teaching in Medical Anatomy (MA). METHODS: MA I and II percentages of the alternating (ALT) and nonalternating (NALT) groups were compared, scores of ALT subgroups (A and B) were compared, and subgroup performance on practical exam questions was compared. RESULTS: MA I and MA II percentages indicated no significant difference in median scores (pMAI=0.581, pMAII=0.223) between ALT and NALT. Subgroup analysis and assessment of question types showed that student performance and ability to identify a structure were not dependent on dissection group assignment. CONCLUSION: Alternating dissections offered students more unscheduled time for independent learning activities, such as studying or shadowing preceptors, and reduced student-to-cadaver and student-to-faculty ratios by 50%. Alternating dissections with peer teaching were not detrimental to student performance.

Are Anatomy PhDs Nearing Extinction or Adapting to Change? United States Graduate Education Trends in the Anatomical Sciences.

Faculty qualified to teach in the anatomical sciences are growing scarce just as the need for trained anatomists is greater than ever. Enrollments are surging in anticipation of a large physician shortfall; meanwhile, many anatomists are reaching retirement age. Who will fill the teaching gap? This study assessed trends in doctorates awarded in Anatomy and related fields within the United States (US) since 1969 and evaluated modern graduate education in the anatomical sciences. Data were compiled from the National Science Foundation Survey of Earned Doctorates. The total number of doctorates in the anatomical sciences and number of doctorates by sex and race/ethnicity were plotted for trend analysis. The number of PhD anatomy training programs within US medical schools was also assessed. Curricula and major characteristics of all active programs were evaluated through website searches and program director interviews. While doctorates in cell biology, developmental biology, and neuroscience have grown, the number of PhDs awarded in Anatomy has declined, on average, by 3.1 graduates per year to a 50-year low of only 8 graduates in 2017. Currently, 21 active doctoral programs in anatomy operate within US medical schools and fall into three general categories: anatomy education (n = 8), classic anatomy (n = 8), and anthropology/evolutionary anatomy (n = 5). Without a concerted effort by stakeholders to address the shortage, anatomists may face extinction. Expansion of the anatomy education doctoral degree may represent a necessary evolution of the field to meet job market needs and to thwart the extinction threat.

Correlating Spatial Ability With Anatomy Assessment Performance: A Meta-Analysis.

Interest in spatial ability has grown over the past few decades following the emergence of correlational evidence associating spatial aptitude with educational performance in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The research field at large and the anatomy education literature on this topic are mixed. In an attempt to generate consensus, a meta-analysis was performed to objectively summarize the effects of spatial ability on anatomy assessment performance across multiple studies and populations. Relevant studies published within the past 50 years (1969-2019) were retrieved from eight databases. Study eligibility screening was followed by a full-text review and data extraction. Use of the Mental Rotations Test (MRT) was required for study inclusion. Out of 2,450 screened records, 15 studies were meta-analyzed. Seventy-three percent of studies (11 of 15) were from the United States and Canada, and the majority (9 of 15) studied professional students. Across 15 studies and 1,245 participants, spatial ability was weakly associated with anatomy performance (rpooled  = 0.240; CI at 95% = 0.09, 0.38; P = 0.002). Performance on spatial and relationship-based assessments (i.e., practical assessments and drawing tasks) was correlated with spatial ability, while performance on assessments utilizing non-spatial multiple-choice items was not correlated with spatial ability. A significant sex difference was also observed, wherein males outperformed females on spatial ability tasks. Given the role of spatial reasoning in learning anatomy, educators are encouraged to consider curriculum delivery modifications and a comprehensive assessment strategy so as not to disadvantage individuals with low spatial ability.

A Look at the Anatomy Educator Job Market: Anatomists Remain in Short Supply.

In 2002, a widely publicized report projected an anatomy educator shortage based on department chairpersons' perceptions. Now, 17 years later, the question lingers: "Does an anatomy educator shortage persist and, if so, how severe is the shortage?" Trends in the number, type, and fill rate of anatomy educator job openings were explored by analyzing job posting in the United States over the past two years. A survey was distributed to leaders of anatomy-related departments in the United States, Canada, and European Union. Most departmental leaders who responded (65% or more) from the United States/Canada (n = 81) and the European Union (n = 52) anticipate they will have "moderate" to "great" difficulty hiring anatomy educators in gross anatomy, histology, and embryology over the next five years. Within the United States, the number of anatomy educator job postings at medical schools more than doubled from at least 21 postings in 2017 to 52 postings in 2018. Twenty-one percent of postings between 2017 and 2018 were never filled. While the number of anatomy educator openings within the United States/Canada is perceived to remain in a steady state for the next five years, the European Union estimates a five-fold increase in the number of openings. Departmental leaders prioritize anatomy educator applicants who have teaching experience (mean ± SD = 4.64 ± 0.84 on five-point Likert scale), versatility in teaching multiple anatomy disciplines (3.93 ± 1.07), and flexibility in implementing various teaching pedagogies (3.69 ± 1.17). Collectively, these data suggest the shortage of anatomy educators continues in the United States/Canada and the European Union.

Bridging the transfer gap: laboratory exercise combines clinical exposure and anatomy review.

OBJECTIVES: One of the goals of medical education is to bridge the gap between basic science and clinical practice. Students acquire basic science knowledge during their pre-clinical years, yet have limited opportunities to apply this knowledge clinically. This hands-on laboratory exercise was designed to facilitate a review of anatomy in the context of select clinical procedures, highlighting the application of anatomical concepts in clinical practice. METHODS: In 2008, Year 2 medical students participated in a clinical procedures laboratory taught by senior residents and attending physicians. Before participating, all students completed anatomy and clinical pre-tests and received syllabi detailing the select procedures and the anatomy pertinent to each. Students were organised into experimental (EG, n = 48) and control (CG, n = 17) groups. The EG observed and practised five procedures on cadavers and the CG participated in a traditional anatomy review laboratory with no procedural demonstrations or practice. Anatomy and clinical post-tests were administered to both groups following the 3-hour interventions. Surveys and focus sessions were used to assess student opinions. RESULTS: Scores on the anatomy pre- and post-tests were compared and were found to have significantly increased (P