Anatomical education forms the foundation of medical practice, the observed imbalance in representations and the need for more inclusive language in anatomy education have been previously explored(Carroll and Harrell, 2025; Nation et al., 2025), underscoring the urgency of addressing these issues to foster equitable learning environments. Contemporary anatomical education exhibits significant systemic representational biases, which undermine clinical preparedness and health equity(Grignon and Duparc, 2021). Despite advancements in medical science, anatomical representation remains disproportionately Eurocentric, male-centric, and phenotypically homogeneous, failing to reflect the diversity of global populations (Beresheim et al., 2024, Kalata et al., 2023). Content analyses of widely used anatomical resources reveal persistent underrepresentation of non-European phenotypes and female anatomical structures. For instance, illustrations in major anatomy textbooks predominantly depict light-skinned individuals, with darker skin tones and medium skin tones being severely underrepresented or entirely absent (Beresheim et al., 2024, Longhurst et al., 2024). Similarly, a pronounced sex bias (male-centric) is evident, with male bodies frequently serving as the default “universal model,” while female representations are largely confined to reproductive contexts, neglecting systemic anatomical variations across sexes (Klein et al., 2020, Lowik et al., 2024).

These representational disparities extend beyond educational resources to research literature, where historical trends show a long-standing dominance of male-only studies and inconsistent reporting of race and ethnicity(Kanakamedala and Haga, 2012). These shortcomings have direct clinical implications: inadequate exposure to anatomical diversity contributes to diagnostic delays, therapeutic errors, and health disparities—particularly for women and individuals with darker skin tones—who may present with morphological or symptomatic variations not captured in standard educational materials (Enomoto et al., 2025).

Ethical dimensions of anatomical education are equally pressing. Historical legacies of colonial specimen acquisition, unconsented dissection, and religious or cultural barriers to body donation continue to influence the demographic composition of anatomical collections(Habicht et al., 2018). Global inequities in donor recruitment, along with underrepresentation of certain racial and ethnic groups in research, risk perpetuating a cycle of exclusion and misrepresentation (Kalata et al., 2023, Klein et al., 2020). While technological innovations such as 3D modeling and virtual anatomy platforms hold promise for simulating diversity, many currently rely on homogeneous datasets and lack adjustable features, thereby risking algorithmic exclusion and reduced educational applicability across diverse populations (Nazer et al., 2023). There is a clear need for intentional, systemic reform in anatomical education—spanning curricular content, digital tool design, and pedagogical approaches.

This study employs a multi-dimensional content analysis to evaluate the current state of racial, sex, and ethical representation across key anatomical education resources—including literature databases, textbooks, and digital platforms. By identifying persistent gaps and temporal trends, we aim to inform evidence-based strategies for creating more inclusive, ethically grounded, and clinically relevant anatomical education. Aligning pedagogical resources with global human diversity is not only an educational imperative but also a necessary step toward equitable health care.