Attitudes of students who study in different departments against body donation

Main Article Content

Asrın Nalbant
Ebru Turhan
Özden Bedre Duygu


Objective: As technology continues to advance, alternative methods of cadaver education have emerged in anatomy lessons. However, cadaver dissection remains a fundamental component of medical education curricula worldwide.

Material and Methods: This research was conducted among students enrolled in health sciences and other disciplines at İzmir Bakırçay University. A total of five hundred and eighty-four students took part in the study. The survey aimed to gather information on students' sociodemographic attributes and their perspectives regarding the potential donation of their and their family members' bodies for use as cadavers after their passing.

Resuts: The analysis of the study's data revealed that students in both groups expressed a reluctance to donate their own bodies or those of their family members. Nonetheless, a majority of students emphasized the significance of cadaveric education, indicating that the willingness to donate cadavers could potentially rise with increased exposure to informative advertisements and comprehensive awareness campaigns.

Conclusion: Despite the prevalent Islamic faith in Turkish society, survey findings indicate that religious beliefs do not significantly impede body donation. The study reveals that the primary deterrent to body donation in Turkey is the perceived lack of professionalism within the institutions accepting such donations. To enhance body donation rates in the country, a promising strategy involves launching comprehensive body donation campaigns through mass media, effectively showcasing the competence and professionalism of the parties involved in these initiatives.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Nalbant, A., Turhan, E., & Bedre Duygu, Özden. (2023). Attitudes of students who study in different departments against body donation. Medical Science and Discovery, 10(8), 521–526.
Research Article
Received 2023-07-24
Accepted 2023-08-05
Published 2023-08-07


Da Rocha AO, Tormes DA, Lehmann N, Schwab RS, Canto RT. 2013. The body donation program at the Federal University of Health Sciences of Porto Alegre: A successful experience in Brazil. Anat Sci Educ 6:199–204.

Boulware LE, Ratner LE, Cooper LA, LaVeist TA, Powe NR. 2004. Whole body donation for medical science: A population-based study. Clin Anat 17: 570–577.

Alexander M, Marten M, Stewart E, Serafin S, Štrkalj G. 2014. Attitudes of Australian chiropractic students toward whole body donation: a cross-sectional study. Anat Sci Educ;7(2):117-23.

Aziz MA, McKenzie JC, Wilson JS, Cowie RJ, Ayeni SA, Dunn BK. 2002. The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics. Anat Rec 269:20–32.

Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. 2010. The anatomy of anatomy: A review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ 3:83–93.

Johnson EO, Charchanti AV, Troupis TG. 2012. Modernization of an anatomy class: From conceptualization to implementation. A case for integrated multimodal-multidisciplinary teaching. Anat Sci Educ 5:354–366.

Pawlina W, Hammer RR, Strauss JD, Heath SG, Zhao KD, Sahota S, Regnier TD, Freshwater DR, Feeley MA. 2011. The hand that gives the rose. Anat Sci Educ 86:139–144.

McLachlan JC, Patten D. 2006. Anatomy teaching: Ghosts of the past, present and future. Med Educ 40:243–253.

Zhang L, Xiao M, Gu M, Zhang Y, Jin J, Ding J. 2014. An overview of the roles and responsibilities of Chinese medical colleges in body donation programs. Anat Sci Educ 7:312–320.

Rizzolo LJ, Stewart WB. 2006. Should we continue teaching anatomy by dissection when?. Anat Rec 289B:215–218.

Sehirli US, Saka E, Sarikaya O. 2004. Attitudes of Turkish anatomists toward cadaver donation. Clin Anat 17:677–681.

Gangata H, Ntaba P, Akol P, Louw G. 2010. The reliance on unclaimed cadavers for anatomical teaching by medical schools in Africa. Anat Sci Educ 3:174–183.

Anyanwu EG, Obikili EN. 2012. Dissecting the dissectors: Knowledge, attitude, and practice of body bequests by Nigerian anatomists. Anat Sci Educ 5: 347–353.

Rokade SA, Gaikawad AP. 2012. Body donation in India: Social awareness, willingness, and associated factors. Anat Sci Educ 5:83–89.

Halou H, Chalkias A, Mystrioti D, Iacovidou N, Vasileiou PV, Xanthos T. 2013. Evaluation of the willingness for cadaveric donation in Greece: A population-based study. Anat Sci Educ 6:48–55.

Asl JA, Nikzad H, Taherian A, Atlasi MA, Naderian H, Mousavi G, Kashani MM, Omidi A. 2017. Cultural acceptability and personal willingness of Iranian students toward cadaveric donation. Anat Sci Educ;10(2):120-126.

Ajita R, Singh YI. 2007. Body donation and its relevance in anatomy teaching— A review. J Anat Soc India 56:44–47.

Bolt S, Venbrux E, Eisinga R, Kuks JB, Veening JG, Gerrits PO. 2010. Motivation for body donation to science: More than an altruistic act. Ann Anat 192:70–74.

Chakraborty SK, Khan H, Islam S, Yousuf BMA. 2010. Body donation and its significance in anatomy learning in Bangladesh – A review. Bangladesh J Anat 8:85–88.

McClea K, Stringer MD. 2010. The profile of body donors at the Otago School of Medical Sciences–has it changed? N Z Med J 123:9–17.

Wijbenga BS, Koning RH, Kooistra-Akse BJ, Bolt S, Kuks JB, van Zanten- Timmer G, Veening JG, Gerrits PO. 2010. ‘Last-minute’ donations influence actuarial prediction in an anatomical body donation program. Ann Anat 192:2–6.

Bolt S, Venbrux E, Eisinga R, Gerrits PO. 2012. Anatomist on the dissecting table? Dutch anatomical professional’s views on body donation. Clin Anat 25:168–175.

Cornwall J, Perry GF, Louw G, Stringer MD. 2012. Who donates their body to science? An international, multicenter, prospective study. Anat Sci Educ 5: 208–216.

Kürkçüoğlu, A., Kosif, R., Anli, S. Ç. (2021). Beden Bağişi Ve Anatomi Eğitimindeki Önemi. Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(3), 645-655.

Magazacı İ, Büyükertan M, Uysal Ö, Balcıoğlu HA. 2018. Attitudes of Dental Students Towards Body and Organ Donation. doi: 10.5505/yeditepe.2018.35220

Gürses, İ. A. , Çelik, S. , Üzel, M. , Barut, Ç. , Kurtoğlu Olgunus, Z. , Bilge, O. "A proposal for body donation forms in Turkey: study of the Committee for Body Donation and Cadaver Monitoring" . Anatomy 14 (2020 ): 220-226 .

Park JT, Jang Y, Park MS, Pae C, Park J, Hu KS, Park JS, Han SH, Koh KS, Kim HJ. 2011. The trend of body donation for education based on Korean social and religious culture. Anat Sci Educ 4:33–38.

Tugtag Demir B, Altintas HM, Bilecenoglu B. Investigation of medical faculty students' views on cadaver and cadaver teaching in anatomy. Morphologie. 2023 Mar;107(356):47-54.

Bilir A, Ertekin T, Turamanlar O, Guzel H, Atay E. Perceptions of cadaver in physiotheraphy students and approaches to use of cadavers for anatomy education. Health Sci. Q. 2021; 1(1) : 31-36

Erbay, H., Bilir, A., Gönül, Y., Turamanlar, O., Songur, A. (2015). Tıp fakültesi öğrencilerinin kadavra algısı ve eğitimde kadavra kullanımına yönelik yaklaşımları.

Bajor G, Likus W, Kuszewski P, Kostro K, Ło_s A, Kłakus P. 2015. “Mortui vivos docent” or who gives his body to science? The analysis of the personal questionnaires of Polish donors in the Conscious Body Donation Program. PLoS One 10:e0121061.

Cornwall J, Schafer C, D’Costa R, Lal N, Nada-Raja S. 2015. Do non-body donors understand what the term “Body donation” really means? Anat Sci Educ 8:593–594.

Cahill KC, Ettarh RR. 2008. Student attitudes to whole body donation are influenced by dissection. Anat Sci Educ 1:212–216.

McHanwell S, Brenner E, Chirculescu AR, Drukker J, Mameren Hv, Mazzotti G, Pais D, Paulsen F, Plaisant O, Caillaud MM, Laforet E, Riederer BM, Sanudo JR, Bueno-Lopez JL, Donate-Oliver F, Sprumont P, Theofilovski-Parapid G, Moxham BJ. 2008. The legal and ethical framework governing body donation in Europe– A review of current practice and recommendations for good practice. Eur J Anat 12:1–24.

Techataweewan N, Panthongviriyakul C, Toomsan Y, Mothong W, Kanla P, Chaichun A, P Amarttayakong P, Tayles N. 2018. Human body donation in Thailand: Donors at Khon Kaen University. Ann Anat;216:142-151.