Assessing Anatomy Knowledge: Student Perceptions of Computer-Based Multiple-Choice Examinations in Medical Education
The increasing adoption of computer-based examinations (CBEs) in medical education, has raised important questions about their effectiveness in assessing anatomy, a discipline that relies heavily on visual-spatial and practical understanding. While computer-based multiple-choice questions (MCQs) offer advantages such as efficiency and standardization, their competence in accurately reflecting students’ anatomical knowledge, particularly in resource-constrained settings, remains uncertain. This cross-sectional descriptive study assessed undergraduate students’ perceptions of computer-based MCQ anatomy assessments at Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma, Nigeria. Using a semi-structured online questionnaire, the data obtained were analyzed using SPSS with statistical significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05. The results indicated that most of the respondents found computer-based MCQs easy to understand. Many students stated that the questions covered the relevant areas of the anatomy curriculum. In addition, a good number of respondents preferred the computer-based examination to the traditional paper-based method. Students indicated that computer-based multiple-choice examinations were useful in assessing their knowledge of anatomy. Nonetheless, practical examinations were still considered important and were preferred as a supporting form of assessment. This finding implies that the use of both computer-based MCQs and practical examinations may allow for a more thorough assessment of students’ competence in anatomy.
Authors
- Osagiede Newton's Osarumwense
- Vidona Willy Barinem
- Shelu Esther Omonye-Abai
- Ogbe Onome Clementina
- Olugbenga Mary Adeola
- Oviosun Ezinne Chidinma
- Abudu Enehinkhae Imuentinyan
Publication Details
- Journal
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
- Published
- 2026-09-09
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22668220
- Primary Topic
- Anatomy and Medical Technology
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00