This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Jonathan D. Wright, MD
Sylvania, Ohio

JAMA. 1995;273(16):1255.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—I see that the study by Ms Mendelsohn and colleagues¹ includes a useful Table regarding frequency of male vs female figures in anatomy texts. However, I cannot see that any of the conclusions drawn by the authors regarding the significance of these findings are supported by the data. The authors state, "As a result, students may develop an incomplete knowledge of normal female anatomy." As reproductive illustrations were excluded from the study and no study of outcome was included, the issue of students' knowledge is not even remotely addressed by the data. It is interesting to note that this comment has been quoted widely in the lay press, including our local newspaper, The Toledo Blade, and it is generally understood by these lay people that the conclusion derives from the data. The only conclusion that can be made from the data presented is that in situations . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?