article · BMC Medical Education
Anatomy education has undergone significant changes in recent years, stressing the need to integrate radiology to enhance clinical and spatial comprehension. However, the perceptions of medical students toward radiology integration in anatomy curricula remain understudied, particularly in resource-limited settings such as Sudanese universities. This study was conducted to assess medical students’ perceptions of integrating radiology in anatomy teaching across four Sudanese universities. This cross-sectional study included 404 medical students from the University of Khartoum, University of Gezira, University of Medical Sciences and Technology, and National University. A structured questionnaire was distributed to collect data on student demographics, perceptions of radiology integration in anatomy, and preferred learning methods. The data were analyzed with IBM SPSS software version 28 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). The study revealed that 58.2% of the students did not perceive radiology as important for teaching anatomy, with 64.4% reporting that radiology did not improve their understanding of anatomical structures. A significant difference in perception was noted between clinical and preclinical students, with clinical students showing more positive views toward radiology integration. Additionally, radiology-integrated sessions are more desirable for clinical anatomy. Sudanese medical students prefer traditional anatomy teaching and view radiology integration negatively. However, clinical students value radiology more than preclinical students. Early structured, interactive radiology sessions are recommended to enhance perceptions and learning. A blended approach that combines traditional and radiology-enhanced methods can improve spatial understanding and clinical application. Future research should evaluate the long-term effects of these integrative strategies on students’ diagnostic and clinical reasoning skills.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1186/s12909-026-09304-6
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.