Structured PREreview of Stress from Cadaver Dissection Linked to Learning Conditions: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa

Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint?

Yes

They clearly state the problem providing relevant background and literature. However, they made strong statements such as "While previous studies have found that the perception of one’s learning environment is associated with the academic performance and well-being of medical students(25), [no study] has specifically examined the relationship between learning conditions during CD and students' stress levels. We think this statement is too strong and should be rephrased.

Are the methods well-suited for this research?

Somewhat appropriate

The authors mentioned that "a total of 9 countries were selected—Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya Malawi, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe—with a total of 2968 respondents and a sample size ranging from 150 to 788 in each country." Could the authors specify how they arrived at these sample sizes? Was it possible to capture details on post-medical school experiences and how they shaped students' behaviors to CD? What about other analyses or subgroups?

Are the conclusions supported by the data?

Somewhat supported

The results and findings presented are very narrow despite the large number of results in figures and tables. This needs to be expanded upon. The results should be interpreted in depth to guide the understanding of all figures and tables. Additionally, authors should compare and contrast their findings extensively and later demonstrate new knowledge and existing gaps/recommendations based on what is not known or known.

Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data?

Highly appropriate and clear

They are well presented. However, the number of figures is a lot for a single article. Authors should consider using more cumbersome data visualization methods to summarize the figures or add another table.

How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research?

Somewhat clearly

Suggestions were already provided.

Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge?

Somewhat likely

The preprint is important for public health issues especially as it seeks to address and important aspect like stress which is related to mental health problems.

Would it benefit from language editing?

No

Would you recommend this preprint to others?

Yes, but it needs to be improved

It would be great if the authors provided a brief background on the burden of the problem in the abstract section. This would smoothly introduce readers to the topic being examined or studied.

Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience?

Yes, after minor changes

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.