ArticleBMC oral health2023
Acceptability of fully guided virtual implant planning software among dental undergraduate students.
Article in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of fully guided implant planning software training on the knowledge acquisition and satisfaction of dental undergraduate students.Medical education online · 2023Trial
- The landscape of virtual simulation in undergraduate dental education with implications for artificial intelligence incorporation.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Improving Evaluation of Dentistry Students in an Oral Surgery and Implantology Subject: The PIETA Rubric.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- A web-based augmented reality system for orthodontic biomechanics: perceived usability and acceptability among dental students.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Biofilm Removal on the Dental Implant Surface by Sodium Bicarbonate and Erythritol Powder Airflow System.European journal of dentistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFully guided implant surgery as a technique is gaining popularity. It has been observed that use of surgical guides improves precision and predictability for dental implant placement. However, like any other newer technology, the acceptance of fully guided dental implant technology among users is based upon its perceived usability. This study aimed at evaluating the perception about using Virtual Implant Planning Software (VIPS) among undergraduate dental students at the university of Sharjah.
methodsNinety-Six dental surgery students from the University of Sharjah were included in the study. One week after the Virtual Implant Planning Software (Planmeca Romexis version 6.2 procedure, students were asked to complete a Combined technology acceptance model and the theory of planned behaviour (C-TAM TPB) questionnaire. Sixty-six students responded to the questionnaire.
resultsCronbach's alpha surpassed 0.7 for perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived behavioral control, and subjective norm. Attitude and behavioural intention reported Cronbach's alpha values less than 0.7. Spearman's correlation coefficient was significant for all the constructs. Perceived ease of use explained 49%, 33%, and 42% of the variance of perceived usefulness (R
conclusionThe fully guided VIPS was acceptable by dental students specifically because of its usability. This makes VIPS a very effective tool for teaching implantology for dental students. VIPS also allows students to perform multiple repetitions of the implant planning procedure which enhances understanding and content retention.
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.