Send to

Choose Destination
Anat Sci Educ. 2018 Apr 16. doi: 10.1002/ase.1789. [Epub ahead of print]

Breaking with tradition: A scoping meta-analysis analyzing the effects of student-centered learning and computer-aided instruction on student performance in anatomy.

Author information

Department of Cell and Molecular Medicine, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois.
Department of Anatomy and Regenerative Biology, George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia.
Rush Medical College, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois.
Galter Health Sciences Library, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Medical Sciences Program, Indiana University School of Medicine, Bloomington, Indiana.
Center for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology, Department of Anthropology, George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia.
Monash Centre for Human Anatomy Education and Monash Centre for Scholarship in Health Education, Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.


While prior meta-analyses in anatomy education have explored the effects of laboratory pedagogies and histology media on learner performance, the effects of student-centered learning (SCL) and computer-aided instruction (CAI) have not been broadly evaluated. This research sought to answer the question, "How effective are student-centered pedagogies and CAI at increasing student knowledge gains in anatomy compared to traditional didactic approaches?" Relevant studies published within the past 51 years were searched using five databases. Predetermined eligibility criteria were applied to the screening of titles and abstracts to discern their appropriateness for study inclusion. A summary effect size was estimated to determine the effects of SCL and CAI on anatomy performance outcomes. A moderator analysis of study features was also performed. Of the 3,035 records screened, 327 underwent full-text review. Seven studies, which comprised 1,564 participants, were included in the SCL analysis. An additional 19 studies analyzed the effects of CAI in the context of 2,570 participants. Upon comparing SCL to traditional instruction, a small positive effect on learner performance was detected (standardized mean difference (SMD = 0.24; [CI = 0.07, 0.42]; P = 0.006). Likewise, students with CAI exposure moderately outscored those with limited or no access to CAI (SMD = 0.59; [CI = 0.20, 0.98]; P = 0.003). Further analysis of CAI studies identified effects (P ≤ 0.001) for learner population, publication period, interventional approach, and intervention frequency. Overall, learners exposed to SCL and supplemental CAI outperformed their more classically-trained peers as evidenced by increases in short-term knowledge gains. Anat Sci Educ.


anatomical sciences education; anatomy teaching; computer-aided instruction; effectiveness of anatomy education; gross anatomy education; medical education; meta-analysis; student performance; student-centered learning; undergraduate education


Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center