The Experts below are selected from a list of 324 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Annie Thompson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Subject Guides. Dental Anatomy, Head & Neck Anatomy and Oral Histology. Head & Neck Anatomy.
2016Co-Authors: Annie ThompsonAbstract:A guide to commonly used resources related to Dental Anatomy, Head & Neck Anatomy and Oral Histology.
-
LibGuides: Dental Anatomy, Head & Neck Anatomy and Oral Histology: Head & Neck Anatomy
2015Co-Authors: Annie ThompsonAbstract:A guide to commonly used resources related to Dental Anatomy, Head & Neck Anatomy and Oral Histology.
-
Research Guides: Dental Anatomy, Head & Neck Anatomy and Oral Histology: Head & Neck Anatomy
2015Co-Authors: Annie ThompsonAbstract:A guide to commonly used resources related to Dental Anatomy, Head & Neck Anatomy and Oral Histology.
-
LibGuides: Anatomy, Physiology & Histology: Gross Anatomy
2010Co-Authors: Annie ThompsonAbstract:This guide will point you to resources that focus on Gross, Head & Neck and Dental Anatomy, Physiology, and Histology Books, E-books and Databases
C M Diaz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
medical student initiated Anatomy education an extracurricular experience at a regional medical school
The Medical Journal of Australia, 2012Co-Authors: Andrew T Hattam, C M DiazAbstract:[Extract] To the Editor: The paucity of human Anatomy teaching at Australian medical schools is well established.1 Recently, a number of 4-year graduate-entry medical schools have sought to improve Anatomy knowledge among students by introducing cadaver-dissection electives2 and extracurricular Anatomy courses.3 Currently, 6-year undergraduate medical programs, such as at James Cook University (JCU), incorporate more Anatomy education than their graduate-entry counterparts.4 However, even 6-year programs offer less Anatomy education than was provided in past eras.4
J Older - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Anatomy a must for teaching the next generation
Surgeon-journal of The Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland, 2004Co-Authors: J OlderAbstract:Teaching Anatomy to both undergraduate medical students and medical graduates is in the midst of a downward spiral. The traditional Anatomy education based on topographical structural Anatomy taught by didactic lectures and complete dissection of the body with personal tuition, has been replaced by a multiple range of special study modules, problem-based workshops, computers, plastic models and many other teaching tools. In some centres, dissected cadaver-based Anatomy is no longer taught. Changing the undergraduate medical curriculum in the UK has taken place without any research into the key aspects of knowledge necessary or comparing methods of teaching. There is no agreement on a common national core curriculum and as a result, numerous new curricula have been introduced. No external audit or validation is carried out, so medical schools have been free to teach and assess their own work themselves. There is a great divergence in medical schools across the UK and Ireland in teaching medicine in general and Anatomy in particular. Published data on the impact of these changes is scant. The reduction in undergraduate teaching and knowledge of Anatomy has caused great concern, not only for undergraduates but also to postgraduate students, especially in surgery. This, together with a change in basic surgical training, a marked reduction in demonstrator posts and a change in examination standards, has set up a system that is allowing young men and women with a poor knowledge of Anatomy to become surgeons. There should be a full public debate at every level; the Royal Colleges, specialist associations, the Universities, Government, both health and education. This debate should highlight areas of concern, explore in depth and define a minimal core curriculum for Anatomy. Teaching must be enhanced with a critical look at both teachers and methods. The dominance of research must be reassessed to establish an equitable cohabitation with teaching. The place of basic science, especially Anatomy in basic surgical teaching, must be examined. A thorough knowledge of Anatomy should be required in the new MRCS-UK. This should be mandatory as a preliminary to higher surgical training. The teaching of Anatomy in surgical specialities must be improved. Does the dissecting room still have a place in educating our under- and postgraduate students? Yes — a sound knowledge of Anatomy is essential if the medical practitioner is going to accurately define and successfully treat the problem presented by the patient. The dissected cadaver remains the most powerful means of presenting and learning Anatomy as a dynamic basis for solving problems. The cadaver must not be dismissed as obsolete. Dissection has survived the most rigorous test of pedagological fitness — the test of time. The student — cadaver — patient encounter is paramount in medical education
Andrew T Hattam - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
medical student initiated Anatomy education an extracurricular experience at a regional medical school
The Medical Journal of Australia, 2012Co-Authors: Andrew T Hattam, C M DiazAbstract:[Extract] To the Editor: The paucity of human Anatomy teaching at Australian medical schools is well established.1 Recently, a number of 4-year graduate-entry medical schools have sought to improve Anatomy knowledge among students by introducing cadaver-dissection electives2 and extracurricular Anatomy courses.3 Currently, 6-year undergraduate medical programs, such as at James Cook University (JCU), incorporate more Anatomy education than their graduate-entry counterparts.4 However, even 6-year programs offer less Anatomy education than was provided in past eras.4
Mark E. Olson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
COMMENTARY: TYPOLOGY, HOMOLOGY, AND HOMOPLASY IN
2020Co-Authors: Comparative Wood Anatomy, Mark E. OlsonAbstract:SUMMARY Comparative wood Anatomy consists of two main efforts: wood identification and evolutionary studies. Evolutionary studies can be divided into two main areas: systematic wood Anatomy and ecological wood Anatomy. The goal of wood identification is the association of a name with a sample; that of systematic wood Anatomy is the discovery of the nested hierarchy of synapomorphies that characterize the phylogeny of the woody plants; the main thrust of ecological wood Anatomy has been to identify structure-function relationships that have evolved repeatedly across clades. Wood anatomical characters can be divided into three types: typological, homologous, and homoplasious. Wood identification can and should use all three types; systematic wood Anatomy must focus on homologies; homologies may be of interest to ecological wood Anatomy, but homoplasies have been its principal focus. The use of typological characters developed for wood identification can produce misleading results in studies of evolutionary wood Anatomy and must be avoided. Robust phylogenies are important for discovering wood anatomical homologies and homoplasies; also important is the need to make explicit, testable hypotheses, and to identify the type of causation (ultimate or proximate) that is of interest for a given study.
-
Commentary: Typology, Homology, and Homoplasy in Comparative Wood Anatomy
Iawa Journal, 2020Co-Authors: Mark E. OlsonAbstract:Comparative wood Anatomy consists of two main efforts: wood identification and evolutionary studies. Evolutionary studies can be divided into two main areas: systematic wood Anatomy and ecological wood Anatomy. The goal of wood identification is the association of a name with a sample; that of systematic wood Anatomy is the discovery of the nested hierarchy of synapomorphies that characterize the phylogeny of the woody plants; the main thrust of ecological wood Anatomy has been to identify structure- function relationships that have evolved repeatedly across clades. Wood anatomical characters can be divided into three types: typological, homologous, and homoplasious. Wood identification can and should use all three types; systematic wood Anatomy must focus on homologies; homologies may be of interest to ecological wood Anatomy, but homoplasies have been its principal focus. The use of typological characters developed for wood identification can produce misleading results in studies of evolutionary wood Anatomy and must be avoided. Robust phylogenies are important for discovering wood anatomical homologies and homoplasies; also important is the need to make explicit, testable hypotheses, and to identify the type of causation (ultimate or proximate) that is of interest for a given study.
