Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34506512›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2021

Multilevel factor analysis of flipped classroom in dental education: A 3-year randomized controlled trial.

Zuo Wang, Eiko Yoshida Kohno, Kenji Fueki, Takeshi Ueno, Yuka Inamochi, Kazuki Takada, Noriyuki Wakabayashi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Student Learning Performance and Satisfaction With a Flipped Classroom in Undergraduate Dental Pharmacology Education.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Zuo WangDepartment of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.
Eiko Yoshida KohnoDepartment of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.
Kenji FuekiDepartment of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.
Takeshi UenoDepartment of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.
Yuka InamochiDepartment of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-9834-9195
Kazuki TakadaDepartment of Professional Development in Health Sciences, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.
Noriyuki WakabayashiDepartment of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrevious studies have rarely attempted to test the confounding factors that may affect learning outcomes of the flipped classroom. The purpose of this study was to assess how flipped classrooms affect the acquisition of knowledge in clinical dental education based on multilevel factor analysis.

methodThe authors conducted a 3-year (2017, 2018, and 2019) randomized controlled trial in a series of introductory prosthodontics courses in dental education. A total of 137 participants were randomly assigned to flipped classroom (n = 70, 51%) or lecture (n = 67, 49%) formats. The flipped group was instructed to self-learn knowledge-based content through online preparation materials, including videos and text, while the lecture group was given text only. Both groups were provided with the same study content and opportunities for different styles of learning. The session attendance rate and number of times the materials were accessed were monitored. Individual and team readiness assurance tests (IRAT/TRAT) were conducted to evaluate knowledge acquisition. A multilevel linear regression analysis was conducted on both instructional styles (flipped vs. lecture) as an intervention factor, and confounding factors that could affect the outcomes were implemented.

resultsThe average number of online accesses was 2.5 times per session in the flipped group and 1.2 in the lecture group, with a significant difference (p < .05). The average IRAT score was significantly higher in the flipped than in the lecture group (effect size [ES] 0.58, p < .001). The number of online accesses was significantly and positively correlated with IRAT scores (0.6 [0.4, 0.8]). The instructional style was significantly and positively correlated with TRAT scores (coefficient [95% confidence interval]: 4.6 [2.0, 7.3]), but it was not correlated with IRAT (4.3 [-0.45, 9.0]).

conclusionsThe flipped classroom was more effective than the lecture format regarding knowledge acquisition; however, the decisive factor was not the instructional style but the number of individual learning occasions. The employment of the flipped classroom was the decisive factor for team-based learning outcomes.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducation, DentalHumansProblem-Based Learning

Identifiers

PMID34506512
PMCPMC8432835

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.