ArticleEuropean endodontic journal2020
Receptivity and Feedback to the Online Endodontics Congress Concept as a Learning Option - An International Survey.
Article in European endodontic journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
objectiveThe traditional face-to-face or on-site lecturing methods are still among the most common forms of delivering knowledge to students in dental education. However, other innovative learning methodologies have the potential to complement, or even improve, the effectiveness and quality of teaching. The aim of this online survey was to analyze the receptivity of endodontics practitioners to a specific online teaching format of a multi-day congress, mimicking an on-site conference, and perceive whether the participants regarded it as an effective way of acquiring knowledge with application in their clinical practice activity.
methodsAn online questionnaire, composed of 17 items, was sent during the last day of a multi-day online congress. Four strands of information were taken into account: demographics; previous online formation experience; personal involvement in the underway online congress; and overview of the online congress concept. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. Total counts, frequencies and descriptive statistics were generated by using SurveyMonkey software.
resultsA total of 1.827 answers were delivered, which represented a return rate of 15.8%. The results indicated that most of the participants agree that online learning could be a good alternative to the traditional on-site learning methodology in improving their practical abilities. In addition, the present survey found that the majority of the attendees support the use of computers as an assisting tool and only 18.0% reported difficulties when using technologies. A high number of practitioners recognized a favourable cost-benefit ratio of using online lessons and stated they would recommend others to participate in online meetings as well.
conclusionOverall, the present results suggest that online learning may be used successfully to improve student's knowledge and enhance their abilities to apply acquired content in clinical situations. Moreover, the participants felt online learning to be effective, engaging and with a favourable cost-benefit ratio.
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.