Table 2 Median (Md), Mean (M), and Standard-Deviations (SD) of Student Participant Survey Scores
Donor-Specific Diagnostic Imaging Group | Pathology-Specific Diagnostic Imaging Group | Mann-Whitney U | P | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Subject Survey Questions | ||||||||
Md | M | SD | Md | M | SD | |||
1. The radiology images provided were clear and easy to interpret. | 4.00 | 4.33 | 0.49 | 4.00 | 4.18 | 0.60 | 72.50 | 0.71 |
2. I would like to see more donor images with pathological findings | 5.00 | 4.93 | 0.26 | 5.00 | 4.82 | 0.40 | 73.00 | 0.56 |
3. I feel more confident in my ability to recognize anatomical structures after correlating my dissection with radiology images provided | 4.00 | 3.60 | 0.99 | 3.50 | 3.40 | 0.97 | 67.00 | 0.66 |
4. The radiology images provided were relevant to the dissection I completed. | 4.00 | 3.50 | 1.23 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 1.41 | 60.50 | 0.37 |
5. This was an appropriate time within the medical curriculum to integrate radiology into anatomical dissection. | 4.00 | 4.00 | 1.00 | 4.00 | 3.55 | 1.04 | 62.00 | 0.30 |
6. The radiology images complemented my understanding of relevant anatomy. | 4.00 | 4.07 | 1.03 | 3.00 | 3.27 | 0.79 | 42.00 | 0.03* |
7. I would like to see cadaver-based radiology integrated earlier in the medical curriculum. | 5.00 | 4.87 | 0.52 | 5.00 | 4.36 | 0.92 | 52.00 | 0.05* |
8. The exposure to digital imaging will help me in my future clinical practice. | 4.00 | 4.29 | 0.73 | 5.00 | 4.36 | 0.81 | 71.00 | 0.74 |
9. Overall I feel that integrating radiology with anatomical dissection is relevant to my future practice and valuable for student learning. | 5.00 | 4.87 | 0.35 | 4.00 | 4.36 | 0.50 | 41.00 | 0.01* |
10. Integrating radiology into the dissection made my donor feel like a patient. | 5.00 | 4.40 | 0.74 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 0.77 | 58.50 | 0.20 |