Evidence for an Ethics–Practice Gap in Digital Anatomy Education: Provenance and Consent Disclosure in English-Language YouTube Videos

The International Federation of Associations of Anatomists Recommendations for the Ethical Use of Anatomical Images advise that images of human tissue should not be shared on non-password-protected internet sites and emphasise transparency regarding tissue provenance and donor consent. However, the extent to which such information is disclosed in publicly accessible digital anatomy education has not been systematically quantified. The aim of this study was to quantify provenance and consent disclosure rates in YouTube anatomy education videos featuring human tissue and examine associations with creator characteristics. A structured content analysis of 239 English-language YouTube videos featuring human tissue across seven anatomical regions assessed provenance disclosure and consent for multimedia use. All eligible videos identified during the search period (2005-2025) were included. Disclosure was defined as the presence of explicit statements regarding provenance or consent. Fisher’s Exact Test examined associations between disclosure practices and creator characteristics. Only 51/239 videos (21.3%) disclosed provenance, while 10/239 (4.2%) documented multimedia-specific consent. Institutional creators disclosed provenance more frequently than individuals (45.0% vs 19.4%), although this difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.066). Significant geographic variation was observed (p < 0.001). No Indian videos disclosed provenance versus 24/59 (40.7%) from the United States and 23/37 (62.2%) from Canada. All multimedia consent disclosures originated from a single creator from the United States. These findings provide the first quantitative evidence of a substantial gap between professional recommendations and current digital dissemination practices in online anatomy education. Although professional guidelines are advisory rather than regulatory instruments, transparency regarding provenance and donor consent remains essential for maintaining donor dignity and public trust.