Espécimes cadavéricos e modelos sintéticos no desempenho acadêmico em anatomia humana: uma revisão sistemática e metanálise

Abstract

The gross human anatomy can be taught through various teaching models, including cadaveric specimens and synthetic models. However, the literature presents controversial evidence regarding their efficacy on undergraduate students’ academic performance. Therefore, the present study compared academic performance in gross human anatomy between undergraduate health science students who took the course using cadaveric specimens and those who took the course using synthetic anatomical models. To this end, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, comprising scientific articles retrieved from six electronic databases. Searches were initially performed on August 24, 2023, without time restrictions, and subsequently updated on July 5, 2025. Randomized controlled trials comparing the academic performance of undergraduate health science students who attended human anatomy classes with cadaveric specimens versus synthetic models were included. The individual risk of bias of the studies was assessed using version 2 of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized studies (RoB 2). The level of evidence was evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The overall effect size was calculated using a random-effects model estimate and reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Seven randomized studies involving 536 undergraduate medical students were included in the meta-analysis. A statistically significant and moderate difference in academic performance was observed between the groups (SMD: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.10 to 1.05]; p = 0.018), favoring interventions with synthetic models, with substantial/considerable heterogeneity (I² = 85.5%), low risk of bias across all included studies, low level of evidence, and low statistical power (0.37) to detect the smallest important effect size (0.20). In conclusion, classes taught with synthetic models were associated with a moderate effect on academic performance in gross human anatomy when compared to classes based on cadaveric specimens. However, due to the low level of evidence, further randomized studies with larger samples and similar teaching models are required to draw more precise conclusions. Furthermore, the findings from this study can at least justify the maintenance of teaching gross human anatomy through synthetic models in universities that, for any reason, still do not have access to cadavers for educational purposes.