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.

Pre- and post-examination reflections of first-year medical students in an integrated medical anatomy course.

Due to the rigor and pace of undergraduate medical anatomy courses, it is not uncommon for students to struggle and fail initially. However, repetition of coursework places an additional burden on the student, instructor, and institution. The purpose of this study was to compare the exam preparation strategies of repeating and non-repeating students to identify areas where struggling students can be supported prior to course failure. As part of their integrated anatomy course, first-year medical students at Indiana University completed a metacognitive Practice-Based Learning and Improvement (PBLI) assignment prior to and after their first exam. In the PBLIs, students were asked to reflect on their exam preparation strategies, confidence, and satisfaction, as well as their predicted and actual exam performance. PBLI responses from non-repeating and repeating students were then analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. A total of 1802 medical students were included in this study, including 1751 non-repeating and 51 repeating students. Based on their PBLI responses, non-repeating students were appropriately confident, somewhat satisfied, and more accurate when predicting their exam performance. Repeating students were overconfident, dissatisfied, and inaccurate when predicting their first exam performance on their initial, unsuccessful attempt but were more successful on their second, repeat attempt. Qualitative analysis revealed that repeating students aimed to improve their studying by modifying their existing study strategies and managing their time more effectively. In conjunction with other known risk factors, these insights into repeater and non-repeater exam preparation practices can help anatomy educators better identify and support potential struggling students.

"A whole new perspective on how the body fits together"-An evaluation of a cadaver laboratory experience for high school students.

The Center for Anatomy and Physiology Education has hosted interactive human cadaver laboratory tours for local high schools (ages 14-18) and undergraduate university students since 2014 to expose students to healthcare careers. Students receive information on the history of body donation and healthcare careers and observe human anatomy on prosections and with isolated organs. The goal of this study was to evaluate students' perceptions of the anatomy laboratory tours and their impact on students' interests in healthcare careers. Students completed pre- and post-tour questionnaires. Responses were analyzed using thematic analysis and linguistic inquiry. Of the 261 students who completed pre-tour questionnaires, 204 (78%) completed the post-tour questionnaire. Before the tour, students anticipated learning about human anatomy and expected to only see but not touch a cadaver. Most students expressed excitement and/or nervousness. A few students viewed the laboratory tour as an opportunity to test if they could see themselves in a healthcare career. After the tour, most students indicated that the tour either met or exceeded their expectations. Students found the laboratory tour to be educational and interesting and were surprised by the opportunity to interact with the donor. Numerous students expressed an increased interest in healthcare careers after the tour. Overall, students perceived the tour as an engaging experience that improved their anatomical knowledge and reinforced/increased their interest in healthcare careers. Academic institutions can positively impact local students by implementing an anatomy tour, sharing access to their in-house human cadaver laboratory, and recruiting instructors to share their anatomy expertise.

Promoting metacognition in an allied health anatomy course.

Metacognition, the ability to self-regulate one's learning and performance, has been shown to improve student outcomes. Anatomy is recognized as one of the toughest courses in allied health curricula, and students could benefit from metacognitive activities. The purpose of this study was to explore the changes in metacognition of allied health students in an anatomy course and identify which groups need support with this skill. First-year physician assistant (MPAS), physical therapy (DPT), and occupational therapy (OTD) students (n = 129) were invited to participate. At the beginning and end of the course, students completed a questionnaire including the metacognitive awareness inventory (MAI) that assesses metacognition. Students were also asked to reflect on their examination performances using a modified Likert scale and participated in reflective discussion boards to encourage development of metacognitive skills, which were thematically analyzed. Paired metacognition scores had increased significantly by the end of the course. However, middle-performers anticipated high grades and were less satisfied with their grade, indicating a disconnect in their metacognition compared to high- and low-performers. Students' receptiveness to modifying study strategies to improve performance declined throughout the course; by mid-way through, they relied more on existing strategies. Increasing time constraints were frequently cited as a major factor when considering study strategies and modification of such strategies. To maximize the effectiveness of metacognitive activities, they should be positioned early in the course when students are most receptive. In addition, middle performers may benefit from additional support to improve metacognition.

Anatomy Nights: An international public engagement event increases audience knowledge of brain anatomy.

Anatomy Nights is an international public engagement event created to bring anatomy and anatomists back to public spaces with the goal of increasing the public's understanding of their own anatomy by comparison with non-human tissues. The event consists of a 30-minute mini-lecture on the anatomy of a specific anatomical organ followed by a dissection of animal tissues to demonstrate the same organ anatomy. Before and after the lecture and dissection, participants complete research surveys designed to assess prior knowledge and knowledge gained as a result of participation in the event, respectively. This study reports the results of Anatomy Nights brain events held at four different venues in the UK and USA in 2018 and 2019. Two general questions were asked of the data: 1) Do participant post-event test scores differ from pre-event scores; and 2) Are there differences in participant scores based on location, educational background, and career. We addressed these questions using a combination of generalized linear models (R's glm function; R version 4.1.0 [R Core Team, 2014]) that assumed a binomial distribution and implemented a logit link function, as well as likelihood estimates to compare models. Survey data from 91 participants indicate that scores improve on post-event tests compared to pre-event tests, and these results hold irrespective of location, educational background, and career. In the pre-event tests, participants performed well on naming structures with an English name (frontal lobe and brainstem), and showed signs of improvement on other anatomical names in the post-test. Despite this improvement in knowledge, we found no evidence that participation in Anatomy Nights improved participants' ability to apply this knowledge to neuroanatomical contexts (e.g., stroke).

Integrating a Cadaver Review Session into the Existing Regional Anesthesia Training for Anesthesiology Residents: An Initial Experience.

The Department of Anesthesiology's Acute Pain Service (APS) places ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) to manage acute peri-operative pain. PNB success is dependent on detailed anatomical knowledge which residents may not have formally reviewed since medical school. This study describes the integration of a cadaver review session (CRS) that reintroduces PNB-related anatomy into the existing APS rotation. During each CRS, an anatomist reviewed the major nerve and surrounding structures, while an APS attending integrated the anatomy with PNB techniques. During the pilot, 1st- and 3rd-year clinical anesthesia (CA) residents (9 CA1s, 7 CA3s) completed pre- and post-session surveys and rated the CRS's perceived value and impact on self-confidence with anatomical knowledge. Following the pilot, an additional 17 CA1s and 9 CA3s participated in the CRS and completed post-session surveys. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize responses and unpaired t tests were used to compare pre- and post-session responses and responses between cohorts. All participants were overwhelmingly positive about the CRS and its value to the APS rotation, with 98% agreeing they recommend the CRS and found it accessible. Residents believed participation would improve board exam (average = 4.83 ± 0.66) and clinical performance (average = 4.86 ± 0.65), and self-reported increases in confidence with anatomical knowledge. Residents in the pilot group reported significantly greater confidence (p < 0.01) in their perceived anatomical knowledge after the CRS. The CRS positively impacted resident confidence in their anatomical knowledge and perceived ability to identify anatomical structures. Residents reported the CRS was a highly valued addition to regional anesthesia training.