ArticlePloS one2021
Magnification effect on fine motor skills of dental students.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementing Deflection Loupes in Endodontic Training of General Dentistry Residents: Effects on Treatment Quality, Procedure Time and Ergonomics.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Trial
- Exploring the Application Capability of ChatGPT as an Instructor in Skills Education for Dental Medical Students: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- A qualitative analysis of Chinese novice general dentists' perspectives on using ergonomic loupes in clinical practice.PloS one · 2026Article
- Undergraduate dental students' knowledge, attitudes, and satisfaction following a step-by-step course in microscopic dentistry.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Effects of magnification on restorative dental preparation performance: a scoping review and level of evidence mapping.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Impact of using magnifying dental loupes on clinical performance during tooth preparation: A systematic review.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2024Review
- Preliminary User Evaluation of a New Dental Technology Virtual Simulation System: Development and Validation Study.JMIR serious games · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study observed the effect of different magnification systems on dental students' real and perceived fine motor skills.
methodsThis was a laboratory-based experimental study. Students in the fifth year of an undergraduate dentistry program (N = 92) participated in this study. The dependent variables were real motor skills, perceived motor skills and time required to complete the fine motor skills test. The independent variable was the use of a magnification system under four conditions. For each condition, the Dental Manual Dexterity Assessment was performed, which consisted of inserting the #3195FF bur into targets positioned on a Styrofoam plate. The accuracy of each penetration of the targets was scored, using a point system with a maximum possible score of 246 points. Students' perceived fine motor skills were assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) that ranged from zero for no skills to ten for maximum skills. A descriptive statistical analysis and the repeated measures ANOVA were performed (α = 0.05).
resultsThe Galilean and Keplerian loupes were found to positively affect students' real fine motor skills (p<0.01); however, perceived fine motor skills and time were significantly better (p<0.01) under the naked eye.
conclusionsDental students' real fine motor skills were better when Galilean and Keplerian loupes were used, but the perceived fine motor skills were not.
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.