Stress from Cadaver Dissection Linked to Learning Conditions: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa

  1. Jude Amechi Nnaka
  2. Victor Udochukwu Ezeike
  3. Kristjan Thompson
  4. Izuchukwu Azuka Okafor

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objective

This study examined the relationship between students’ perceptions of cadaver dissection (CD) and some learning conditions during CD.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional study involving 2968 medical students and graduates exposed to CD at nine countries systematically and proportionally selected from Sub-Saharan African countries based on their ranking on the four World Bank indices of development and education: population, literacy, human capital index (HCI), and human development index (HDI). A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect relevant data on learning conditions during CD experience of the participants, using online channels, including email, Whatsapp, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.

Results

About half (48.76%) of the participants perceived CD as stressful, while 51.24% thought otherwise. However, 57% of participants from institutions where a CD session lasts three hours described their experience as stressful, whereas 69.67% of participants whose institution spent one hour in a single CD session agreed that CD is not stressful. Similarly, 60.63% of participants from institutions with a student-donor ratio between 5 to 10 students per cadaver described their experience as ‘not stressful’. In comparison, 57.51% of participants from institutions with a student-donor ratio of 10–20 students per donor and 53.80% of participants from institutions with over 20 students per donor described their experience as stressful.

Conclusions

Students from institutions with CD instructors, shorter CD sessions, and a smaller student-donor ratio are more likely to perceive CD as stress-free. Providing more support for students during CD and reducing time for CD may be an antidote to CD-related stress.

Article activity feed

  1. PREreview

    This Zenodo record is a permanently preserved version of a Structured PREreview. You can view the complete PREreview at https://prereview.org/reviews/14171631.

    Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint? Yes They clearly state the problem providing relevant background and literature. However, they made strong statements such as "While previous studies have found that the perception of one's learning environment is associated with the academic performance and well-being of medical students(25), [no study] has specifically examined the relationship between learning conditions during CD and students' stress levels. We think this statement is too strong and should be rephrased.
    Are the methods well-suited for this research? Somewhat appropriate The authors mentioned that "a total of 9 countries were selected—Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya Malawi, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe—with a total of 2968 respondents and a sample size ranging from 150 to 788 in each country." Could the authors specify how they arrived at these sample sizes? Was it possible to capture details on post-medical school experiences and how they shaped students' behaviors to CD? What about other analyses or subgroups?
    Are the conclusions supported by the data? Somewhat supported The results and findings presented are very narrow despite the large number of results in figures and tables. This needs to be expanded upon. The results should be interpreted in depth to guide the understanding of all figures and tables. Additionally, authors should compare and contrast their findings extensively and later demonstrate new knowledge and existing gaps/recommendations based on what is not known or known.
    Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data? Highly appropriate and clear They are well presented. However, the number of figures is a lot for a single article. Authors should consider using more cumbersome data visualization methods to summarize the figures or add another table.
    How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research? Somewhat clearly Suggestions were already provided.
    Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge? Somewhat likely The preprint is important for public health issues especially as it seeks to address and important aspect like stress which is related to mental health problems.
    Would it benefit from language editing? No
    Would you recommend this preprint to others? Yes, but it needs to be improved It would be great if the authors provided a brief background on the burden of the problem in the abstract section. This would smoothly introduce readers to the topic being examined or studied.
    Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience? Yes, after minor changes

    Competing interests

    The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2024.07.09.24310166v1 on medRxiv