Jones D Gareth, Dias G J, Mercer S, Zhang M, Nicholson H D
Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, University of Otago, PO Box 913, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Clin Anat. 2002 May;15(3):228-32. doi: 10.1002/ca.10017.
Clinical anatomy is too often viewed as a discipline that reiterates the wisdom of the past, characterized more by description of what is known than by active investigation and critical analysis of hypotheses and ideas. Various misconceptions follow from an acceptance of this premise: the teaching of clinical anatomists is textbook based, there is no clinical anatomy research worthy of the name, and any research that does exist fails to utilize modern technology and does not stand comparison with serious biomedical research as found in cell and molecular biology. The aim of this paper is to challenge each of these contentions by reference to ongoing clinical research studies within this department. It is argued that all teaching (including that of clinical anatomy) should be research-informed and that the discipline of clinical anatomy should have at its base a vigorous research ethos driven by clinically related problems. In interacting with physicians, the role of the clinical anatomist should be to promulgate a questioning scientific spirit, with its willingness to test and challenge accepted anatomic dicta.
