Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36767406›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Innovative Pedagogical Strategies in Health Professions Education: Active Learning in Dental Materials Science.

Galvin Sim Siang Lin, Wen-Wu Tan, Hung-Jia Tan, Chia-Wee Khoo, Kelvin I Afrashtehfar

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Galvin Sim Siang LinDepartment of Dental Materials, Faculty of Dentistry, Asian Institute of Medicine, Science and Technology (AIMST) University, Bedong 08100, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-3996-5470
Wen-Wu TanDepartment of Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dentistry, Asian Institute of Medicine, Science and Technology (AIMST) University, Bedong 08100, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-6260-7348
Hung-Jia TanDepartment of Dental Materials, Faculty of Dentistry, Asian Institute of Medicine, Science and Technology (AIMST) University, Bedong 08100, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-5519-6341
Chia-Wee KhooDepartment of Dental Materials, Faculty of Dentistry, Asian Institute of Medicine, Science and Technology (AIMST) University, Bedong 08100, Malaysia.
Kelvin I AfrashtehfarEvidence-Based Practice Unit, Clinical Sciences Department, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman City P.O. Box 346, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0002-6053-8967
AIMST University · MYUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dental materials science education is frequently delivered via traditional didactic lectures in preclinical dental programs. This review aimed to appraise the current evidence on innovative pedagogical strategies in teaching dental materials science courses. English-language articles on teaching methods for dental materials science published between January 1990 to October 2022 were searched in nine online databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science [WoS], Science Direct, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, LILACS, Open Grey, and EMBASE) according to PRISMA guidelines. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB-2 and ROBIN-I tools, whereas the level of evidence was determined based on the OCEBM guidelines. Only 12 primary studies were included. Two randomized studies (RCTs) were deemed as being of "some concern", and one showed a high risk of bias (RoB). Three non-randomized controlled studies (NRS) demonstrated a moderate RoB, whereas the remaining seven were low. Most studies were ranked at Levels 2 and 3 of evidence. Several innovative pedagogical strategies were identified: flipped classrooms, clinical-based learning, computer-assisted learning, group discussion, microteaching with the BOPPPS (bridge-in, learning objective, pre-test, participatory learning, post-test, and summary) model, and game-based learning. The evidence suggested that students generally showed positive perceptions toward these pedagogical strategies. Dental educators should revise their current undergraduate dental materials science curricula and integrate more effective teaching methods.

Indexed as

Materials ScienceProblem-Based LearningCurriculumHealth OccupationsHumansStudentsactive learningdental educationdental materialflipped classroomgroup discussionpedagogyundergraduate

Identifiers

PMID36767406
PMCPMC9915854
OpenAlexW4317734463

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.