ArticleDentistry journal2022
Online Unproctored Clinical Examinations: The Perceptions and Performance of Final Year Dental Students.
Article in Dentistry journal, 2022. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recommendations for Enhancing Oral Health Professional Education Through the Student Voice: The ADEE-EDSA Partnership in Action.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTake home, or open-book, examinations (OBE) are designed to be completed at a location of student choice, whilst providing comprehensive assessment of learning outcomes. Supporters of OBE refer to their authenticity, in that they reflect real-world practice where use of external resources is routine and encouraged. A contrasting view is that efficient practice requires a solid base of knowledge upon which to draw. The aim of this evaluation was to elicit learners' perceptions of the open-book, unproctored examination approach; we sought student views on authenticity, assessment preparation, use of resources, and anxiety.
methodsQuantitative and qualitative data were gathered using an online, self-administered survey. We sought to determine the correlation between student views and examination performance via consideration of final examination marks.
resultsHeightened anxiety levels tended to increase assessment preparations and were found to be inversely related to learners' perceptions that the OBE was an authentic test. An inverse relationship was seen between learners' OBE examination performance and consulting resources during the examination. Examination marks were not significantly related to endorsement of continued online delivery of learning, time spent preparing for OBE in comparison to other types of assessment, greater anxiety than usual, perceptions of test authenticity, or experiencing a supportive test environment.
conclusionsThe results of this study may inform curriculum and assessment development, learning and teaching practices, and support student voice and experience.
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.