ArticleJournal of dental sciences2019
The learning experience of basic science and clinical dentistry by postgraduate students in Institute of Clinical Dentistry and Institute of Oral Biology.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The landscape and challenges of postgraduate dental basic research education: a scoping review.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- [Basic dental sciences as the foundations for clinical practice].Revista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background/purposeStudents with different undergraduate trainings may have different responses after taking a combined course with both clinical and basic topics. This study investigated the learning experience of basic science and clinical dentistry by postgraduate students in Institute of Clinical Dentistry (ICD) and Institute of Oral Biology (IOB) after finishing the specific course. MATERIALS AND
methodsSemi-structure questionnaire filled by internet process was used. The data were collected and analyzed statistically.
resultsNineteen participants who took the course of "panel discussion of oral oncology" since 2014 to 2018 were included in this study. Of the 19 postgraduate students, 11 were from ICD and 8 from IOB. Both ICD and IOB students gave high scores for the items such as benefit for the research, appropriateness of the discussion topics, and suitableness of problem-based teaching model. ICD students tended to have better fitness of interdisciplinary learning (
conclusionOur problem-based and constructive teaching course and the selected topics are proper and helpful for students' future research. The students with the clinical training background are prone to have better understanding of clinical topics, while those with the basic science training tend to have better understanding of basic science topics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.