Trial reportBMC medical education2022
Assessment of life support skills of resident dentists using OSCE: cross-sectional survey.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping the medical status of patients in a dental school: adapting dental curricula to demographic change - a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Redesigning Advanced Life Support teaching and assessment using a constructive alignment approach.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2025Article
- The use of the objective structured clinical examination to evaluate paediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills in medical students and measures to improve training.BMC medical education · 2024Observational
- Proficiency, Prospects, and Barriers Regarding Basic and Comprehensive Cardiovascular Life Support Skills Among Dental Professionals in India: A Mixed-Method Study.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
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
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this cross-sectional survey was to apply the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) to evaluate the cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and endotracheal intubation skills of resident dentists for stage assessment in standardized training.
methodsA total of 146 third-year resident dentists were recruited and randomly assigned to perform either CPR or endotracheal intubation. Their performance was scored by experienced anesthesiologists with standardized scoring criteria. Participants were also asked to rated their self-assessed competence, willingness, and perceptions on training status using Likert-type scales in a questionnaire. Student's ttest was applied to compare scores for CPR and endotracheal intubation performed by resident dentists with different characteristics. The results of the questionnaires were analyzed and visualized by the R package 'Likert'. Significance was set at the P < 0.05 level.
resultsThe mean OSCE score for endotracheal intubation (59.1 ± 12.5) was lower than that of CPR (72.4 ± 8.8). Participants with Master's degrees scored higher than those with Bachelor's degrees and Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degrees in the assessment of CPR and endotracheal intubation. Low scores of self-assessed competence and willingness were observed, especially for endotracheal intubation. Resident dentists showed poor satisfaction on training volume and frequency of CPR and endotracheal intubation.
conclusionResident dentists showed poor performance on CPR and endotracheal intubation assessed by the OSCE. Relatively low self-assessed competence and willingness were reported in endotracheal intubation. The medical emergency curriculum for resident dentists should be more consistent and standardized to help resident dentists enhance the proficiency of life support 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.