Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37504230›Full record

ArticleDentistry journal2023

Dental Teacher Feedback and Student Learning: A Qualitative Study.

Peter Fine, Albert Leung, Ingrid Tonni, Chris Louca

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dentistry journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

4 authors.

Peter FineUCL Eastman Dental Institute, London WC1E 6ED, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7228-2743
Albert LeungUCL Eastman Dental Institute, London WC1E 6ED, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4011-8022
Ingrid TonniDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, Dental School, University of Brescia, 25121 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7252-9160
Chris LoucaDental Academy, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO1 2QG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7925-8068

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFeedback is essential to improve student learning and motivation and to encourage curriculum development by teachers. This study looked at feedback to and from dental students from a qualitative perspective.

methodsDental teachers were recruited exclusively to this study from the membership of the Association for Dental Education in Europe (ADEE). Delegates from each of the four annual ADEE conferences were invited to attend focus groups to discuss aspects of feedback. Focus groups established an individual theme for the respective conferences: (i) the role of the teacher in delivering feedback; (ii) feedback from the students' perspective; (iii) changes to feedback due to the COVID-19 pandemic; and (iv) integrating feedback with assessments.

resultsQualitative data collected from the conference delegates were diverse and thought provoking. Delegates reported different styles of feedback varying from individual, personal feedback to no feedback at all. An enforced and mostly positive adaptation to online delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic was reported. A partial return to pre-pandemic practices was described.

conclusionsFeedback is well recognized by students and teachers as contributing to learning. A universal approach to delivering feedback as part of the student learning process can be challenging due to a multitude of variables. Many aspects of changes in dental education, teaching, and feedback practices adopted as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic have been retained post-pandemic, thereby accelerating the anticipated progression to online teaching.

Indexed as

dental educationfeedbackqualitative

Identifiers

PMID37504230
PMCPMC10377767

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.