National Survey of Narrative Assessment in LCME-accredited Anatomy Laboratories

Abstract Narrative assessment is a key component of competency-based medical education, providing qualitative information that supports learner development and professional growth. LCME Element 9.5 requires narrative assessment whenever teacher–student interaction permits, yet its implementation in anatomy laboratories remains poorly characterized. This descriptive, cross-sectional survey examined anatomy instructional modalities, narrative-assessment practices, reviewer structures, feedback characteristics, and faculty perceptions among respondents affiliated with LCME-accredited U.S. medical schools. Faculty from 155 institutions were invited; 58 responses were included in the analytic sample. Among 49 respondents who completed the instructional-modality item, cadaveric dissection was the most common instructional modality ( n = 30), followed by prosection ( n = 12), other approaches ( n = 5), and virtual anatomy ( n = 2). Nine respondents did not answer this item. Narrative assessment was reported by 31 of 58 respondents (53%). Because of small and uneven modality subgroup sizes, instructional-modality comparisons were interpreted descriptively. Among respondents reporting narrative assessment, feedback was typically delivered during the session or within 48 h, and most described their feedback as personalized. Respondents generally rated narrative assessment as beneficial. Reviewer workload was not associated with perceived benefit. Open-text responses highlighted barriers including time constraints, competing instructional demands, difficulty observing individual performance, and uncertainty regarding accreditation expectations. Narrative assessment was valued but implemented inconsistently among respondents, with workload and class size frequently identified as practical constraints. These findings describe current respondent-reported practices and identify practical considerations relevant to developing sustainable feedback strategies that uphold LCME standards in anatomy laboratories.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medical Science Educator
Published
2026-08-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-026-02861-x
Primary Topic
Anatomy and Medical Technology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

National Survey of Narrative Assessment in LCME-accredited Anatomy Laboratories

Helen Kaiser, Christian Cormas
Medical Science Educator
Anatomy and Medical Technology
article

National Survey of Narrative Assessment in LCME-accredited Anatomy Laboratories

Helen Kaiser, Christian Cormas
article en

Abstract

Abstract Narrative assessment is a key component of competency-based medical education, providing qualitative information that supports learner development and professional growth. LCME Element 9.5 requires narrative assessment whenever teacher–student interaction permits, yet its implementation in anatomy laboratories remains poorly characterized. This descriptive, cross-sectional survey examined anatomy instructional modalities, narrative-assessment practices, reviewer structures, feedback characteristics, and faculty perceptions among respondents affiliated with LCME-accredited U.S. medical schools. Faculty from 155 institutions were invited; 58 responses were included in the analytic sample. Among 49 respondents who completed the instructional-modality item, cadaveric dissection was the most common instructional modality ( n = 30), followed by prosection ( n = 12), other approaches ( n = 5), and virtual anatomy ( n = 2). Nine respondents did not answer this item. Narrative assessment was reported by 31 of 58 respondents (53%). Because of small and uneven modality subgroup sizes, instructional-modality comparisons were interpreted descriptively. Among respondents reporting narrative assessment, feedback was typically delivered during the session or within 48 h, and most described their feedback as personalized. Respondents generally rated narrative assessment as beneficial. Reviewer workload was not associated with perceived benefit. Open-text responses highlighted barriers including time constraints, competing instructional demands, difficulty observing individual performance, and uncertainty regarding accreditation expectations. Narrative assessment was valued but implemented inconsistently among respondents, with workload and class size frequently identified as practical constraints. These findings describe current respondent-reported practices and identify practical considerations relevant to developing sustainable feedback strategies that uphold LCME standards in anatomy laboratories.

Medical Science Educator
Prisma Health (US)
University of South Carolina
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Anatomy and Medical Technology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.