ArticleMedical science educator2019
Debate as an Adjunct Tool in Teaching Undergraduate Dental Students.
Article in Medical science educator, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Debating: effective and satisfactory learning method in dentistry.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Article
- Interactive Crossword Puzzles as an Adjunct Tool in Teaching Undergraduate Dental Students.International journal of dentistry · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This work is an attempt to explore the potential of a new educational method that integrates debate as a teaching tool. This new teaching method was implemented into a single academic semester of an undergraduate bachelor of dentistry program. We sought to combine knowledge delivery with high-level debate between student debaters, and with the active participation of the audience who were themselves students. The teaching method comprised of three elements namely debates, reply speeches, and policy papers. Debating followed the World School Debate Championship (WSDC) format. Debate evaluation involved five main categories; argument, rebuttal, style, definition and strategy, and points of information (POIs). Student perception towards this educational method was evaluated using a Likert-scale questionnaire. Students gained valuable knowledge from the experience as reflected by the favorable Likert outcome scores. This work sheds light on the potential advantages of utilizing debate as a teaching tool from a student's perspective. Implementing debate in teaching improved students' ability to search and appraise scientific papers and proved to be meaningful and enjoyable. The carefully tailored 10-week format ensured good student responsiveness and engaged the entire class in an interactive, participatory setup. This educational method proved to be very effective in evidence-based dentistry teaching by promoting a deeper approach to learning that can help students to learn meaningfully and enhance their critical thinking skills.
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.