Tracing-based drawing method enhances anatomy learning outcomes and proportional awareness: a randomized cross-over study
9 affiliations
- 1Fujian Provincial Center for Geriatrics, Fuzhou University Affiliated Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, 350001 China
- 2Shengli Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001 China
- 3Department of General Practice Medicine, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, 350001 China
- 4Department of Neurology, Fujian Institute of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350005 China
- 5Department of Nuclear Medicine, Fuzhou University Affiliated Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, 350001 China
- 6Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001 China
- 7Department of Neurosurgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, 350001 China
- 8Laboratory of Clinical Applied Anatomy, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Key Laboratory of Brain Aging and Neurodegenerative Diseases of Fujian Province, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001 China
- 9Institute of Image Communication and Network Engineering, School of Integrated Circuits (School of Information Science and Electronic Engineering), Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240 China
Abstract
Background: Freehand drawing can support active anatomy learning but may be challenging for beginners, particularly when reproducing complex anatomical structures and proportions. The Tracing-Based Drawing Method (TBDM) combines standardized 1:1 cranial templates with transparent tracing to provide structured support during anatomy drawing practice.
Methods: In this randomized cross-over study, 60 first-year medical students were assigned to two randomized method sequences (n = 30 each). At T1, Group A used TBDM and Group B used the Traditional Memory-Based Method (TMBM) to draw the anterior skull view. At T2, the methods were crossed over and both groups drew the lateral skull view. One week later, participants repeated the anterior and lateral drawing tasks at T3 and T4, respectively. Six blinded evaluators assessed structural completeness, proportional accuracy, adjacency accuracy, and artistic quality. Drawing outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models accounting for repeated measurements, assessment occasion, and randomized group/sequence.
Results: TBDM was associated with a higher total drawing score than TMBM, with an adjusted mean difference of 11.96 points (95% CI, 11.42 to 12.51; p < 0.0001). In the timing/view sensitivity analysis, the estimated TBDM-minus-TMBM difference was 14.17 points at the immediate assessment (95% CI, 13.54 to 14.80) and 9.75 points at the one-week delayed assessment (95% CI, 9.12 to 10.38; both p < 0.0001). Learner-reported ratings also favored TBDM, with an adjusted mean difference of 0.55 points on a five-point scale (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.62; p < 0.0001).
Conclusion: TBDM was associated with higher drawing performance and more positive learner ratings than TMBM. A positive method contrast was observed at both the immediate and one-week delayed assessments, although the difference was smaller at the delayed assessment. TBDM may provide a low-cost, structured complement to existing anatomy-learning methods. Its longer-term and transferable educational effects require further investigation.
Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10024-0.
Related
- Clinical Outcomes of Contemporary Frozen Elephant Trunk Prostheses and the Ascyrus Medical Dissection Stent in Aortic Arch Surgery: A Systematic Review and Proportional Meta-Analysis.
- Meta-analysis and network meta-analysis of time-to-event outcomes with non-proportional hazards: a Bayesian time-varying hazard ratio approach.
- Do 3D-printed craniofacial fracture models improve learning outcomes in maxillofacial trauma? A multicenter cluster-randomized trial.
- Blood flow restriction of sport-specific repeated-sprint training enhances acute physiological responses in elite female boxers: a randomized, crossover trial
- Impact of an HPV awareness seminar on vaccine health outcomes in Philippine Catholic schools
BibTeX
@article{wu2026tracingbased,
title = {{Tracing-based drawing method enhances anatomy learning outcomes and proportional awareness: a randomized cross-over study}},
author = {Yun Wu and Senyuan Li and Tong Gao and Yipeng Zhou and Yuandong Zhuang},
journal = {BMC Medical Education},
year = {2026},
month = jul,
doi = {10.1186/s12909-026-10024-0},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10024-0},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Tracing-based drawing method enhances anatomy learning outcomes and proportional awareness: a randomized cross-over study
AU - Yun Wu
AU - Senyuan Li
AU - Tong Gao
AU - Yipeng Zhou
AU - Yuandong Zhuang
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/07/27
JO - BMC Medical Education
DO - 10.1186/s12909-026-10024-0
UR - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10024-0
AB - Background: Freehand drawing can support active anatomy learning but may be challenging for beginners, particularly when reproducing complex anatomical structures and proportions. The Tracing-Based Drawing Method (TBDM) combines standardized 1:1 cranial templates with transparent tracing to provide structured support during anatomy drawing practice. Methods: In this randomized cross-over study, 60 first-year medical students were assigned to two randomized method sequences (n = 30 each). At T1, Group A used TBDM and Group B used the Traditional Memory-Based Method (TMBM) to draw the anterior skull view. At T2, the methods were crossed over and both groups drew the lateral skull view. One week later, participants repeated the anterior and lateral drawing tasks at T3 and T4, respectively. Six blinded evaluators assessed structural completeness, proportional accuracy, adjacency accuracy, and artistic quality. Drawing outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models accounting for repeated measurements, assessment occasion, and randomized group/sequence. Results: TBDM was associated with a higher total drawing score than TMBM, with an adjusted mean difference of 11.96 points (95% CI, 11.42 to 12.51; p < 0.0001). In the timing/view sensitivity analysis, the estimated TBDM-minus-TMBM difference was 14.17 points at the immediate assessment (95% CI, 13.54 to 14.80) and 9.75 points at the one-week delayed assessment (95% CI, 9.12 to 10.38; both p < 0.0001). Learner-reported ratings also favored TBDM, with an adjusted mean difference of 0.55 points on a five-point scale (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.62; p < 0.0001). Conclusion: TBDM was associated with higher drawing performance and more positive learner ratings than TMBM. A positive method contrast was observed at both the immediate and one-week delayed assessments, although the difference was smaller at the delayed assessment. TBDM may provide a low-cost, structured complement to existing anatomy-learning methods. Its longer-term and transferable educational effects require further investigation. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10024-0.
SN - 1472-6920
ER -