Strides in Development of Medical Education

Document Type : Original Article


1 M.Sc. in Anatomy, Instractor of Biology & Anatomy Dept., Medical School, Shahid Sadooghi Medical Sciences University, Yazd, Iran

2 Ph.D. in Anatomy, Assistant Professor Biology & Anatomy Dept., Medical School, Shahid Sadooghi Medical Sciences University, Yazd, Iran.

3 Ph.D. in Histology, Assistant Professor Biology & Anatomy Dept., Medical School, Shahid Sadooghi Medical Sciences University, Yazd, Iran.


Background & Objective: At present two teaching methods of traditional and integration are used for the theoretical instruction of anatomical sciences including anatomy histology and embryology It is thought that the integration teaching method can help Medical students especially in their clinical course of study This study was designed to find the attitudes of Medical students of Yazd University of Medical Sciences toward this method in teaching anatomical sciences courses Methods: This study was done on Medical students who had been educated by the integration method Data collection was done by using a self administrated questionnaire in four domains of knowledge about the integration program of anatomical sciences courses facilities of the integration process order of course presentation and satisfaction of the integration plan Data were analyzed through SPSS software package Results : Most of the respondents had moderate familiarity with the integration method and asserted that this method had moderately facilitated their learning process in anatomical sciences courses According to most participants the rate of coordination between the organ system was moderate Students satisfaction of integration of embryology histology and anatomy courses was high In regard to the order of course presentation participants preferred histology embryology anatomy and physiology order Conclusion: Attitudes of Medical students toward horizontal integration method of basic sciences courses was moderate and based on the obtained results it seems that the best presentation order is respectively histology embryology anatomy and physiology


  1. Harden RM. The integration ladder: A tool for curriculum planning and evaluation. Med Educ 2000; 34(7): 551-7.
  2. Duban S, Mennin S, Waterman R, Lucero S, Stubbs A, Vanderwagen C, et al. Teaching clinical skills to pre-clinical medical students: Integration with basic science learning. Med Educ 1982; 16(4): 183-7.
  3. Green BN, Johnson CD, Vuong J, Luckock AS, Waagen G. Use of a clinical seminar to horizontally integrate basic science and clinical topics for year-one students. J Allied Health. 2008; 37(3): e160-76 .
  4. Brueckner JK, Gould DJ. Health science faculty members’ perceptions of curricular integration: Insights and obstacles. J Int Ass Med Sci Educ 2006; 16(1): 31-4.
  5. Schmidt H. Integrating the teaching of basic sciences, clinical sciences, and bio psychosocial issues. Acad Med 1998; 73(9 Suppl): S24-31.
  6. Ghosh S, Pandya HV. Implementation of integrated learning program in neurosciences during first year of traditional medical course: Perception of students and faculty. BMC Med Educ 2008; 8: 44.
  7. Ghosh S, Dawka V. Combination of didactic lecture with problem-based learning sessions in physiology teaching in a developing medical college in Nepal. Adv Physiol Educ 2000; 24(1): 8-12.
  8. Prince KJ, Van Mameren H, Hylkema N, Drukker J, Scherpbier AJ, Van Der Vleuten CP. Does problem-based learning lead to deficiencies in basic science knowledge? An empirical case on anatomy. Med Educ 2003; 37(1): 15-21.
  9. Percac S, Goodenough DA. Problem based teaching and learning as a bridge from basic anatomy to clinical clerkships. Surg Radiol Anat 1998; 20(3): 203-7.
  10. O'Neill PA, Morris J, Baxter CM. Evaluation of an integrated curriculum using problem-based learning in a clinical environment: The Manchester experience. Med Educ 2000; 34(3): 222-30.
  11. Dick ML, King DB, Mitchell GK, Kelly GD, Buckley JF, Garside SJ. Vertical Integration in teaching and learning (VITAL): An approach to medical education in general practice. Med J Aust 2007; 187(2): 133-5.
  12. Croen LG, Lief PD, Frishman WH. Integrating basic science and clinical teaching for third-year medical students. J Med Educ 1986; 61(6): 444-53.
  13. Gotjamanos T. Integration of basic biological sciences and clinical dentistry in the dental curriculum. A clinically orientated approach to teaching oral and dental anatomy. Aust Dent J 1990; 35(3): 290-3.
  14. Dahle LO, Brynhildsen J, Behrbohm Fallsberg M, Rundquist I, Hammar M. Pros and cons of vertical integration between clinical medicine and basic science within a problem-based undergraduate medical curriculum: Examples and experiences from Linkoping, Sweden. Med Teach 2002; 24(3): 280-5.
  15. Anderson K, Thomson J. Vertical integration - reducing the load on GP teachers. Aust Fam Physician 2009; 38(11): 907-10.
  16. Dutta S. Conventional teaching in basic science: An inner view. Al Ameen J Med Sci 2010; 3(3): 246-50
  17. Cliff WH, Wright AW. Directed case study method for teaching human anatomy and physiology. Am J Physiol 1996; 270(6 Pt 3): S19-28.
  18. Abu-Hijleh MF, Chakravarty M, Al-Shboul Q, Kassab S, Hamdy H. Integrating applied anatomy in surgical clerkship in a problem-based learning curriculum. Surg Radiol Anat 2005; 27(2): 152-7.
  19. Khan MM. Assessment of anatomy curriculum for future cliniansat College of Medicine King Saudi University. Pak J Med Sci 2007; 23 (4): 625-9.
  20. Kumar RK, Freeman B, Velan GM, De Permentier PJ. Integrating histology and histopathology teaching in practical classes using virtual slides. Anat Rec B New Anat 2006; 289(4): 128-33.