ArticleBMC medical education2024
Debating: effective and satisfactory learning method in dentistry.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of surgical visualization headset in dental education for preclinical bone augmentation surgery.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Community-Based Learning and Its Relevance in Dental Surgeon Education.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- Advancing Race-Conscious Medicine: Using Debate to Promote Critical Appraisal of Race in Medical Literature.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Using an Analog Multifunctional Model to Develop Cognitive Skills in Dental Implants.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Rubric for peer evaluation of oral presentations: Use and perceptions among experienced and non-experienced students.Journal of dental education · 2025Article
- Interdisciplinary problem-based learning model for standardized dental residency training: from theory to practice in dental trauma management.Frontiers in medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEducation in the modern world of health needs diverse methods of learning and teaching. The traditional education model has limited capacity for developing abilities such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and reasoning skills. Therefore, improving the quality of teaching-learning processes requires implementing educational innovations in the classroom and evaluating them. This study aimed to determine the impact of the debate teaching method on improving the abilities of general dentistry doctoral students.
methodsThe research was a semi-experimental study with pre-tests and post-tests to measure the knowledge and abilities of students. The study included 60 dental students who completed the fall 2022 session of the Community Oral Health (COH) 2 practical course. This course, one of three practical components within the Community Oral Health curriculum, aligns with the educational framework of general dentistry. Challenging topics on which there is no consensus in dentistry were chosen for the debate. The descriptive statistics indicators include an independent t-test and variance analysis test with a significance level of 5%. Were used to analyze the data.
resultsThe results of the study showed that the average total knowledge (P < 0.001), 'perception of critical thinking skills (P < 0.001), expression power (P < 0.001), reasoning skills (P = 0.003), interpretation and Information analysis power (P < 0.001), the ability to find and use scientific databases (P < 0.001) and the ability to analyze and evaluate evidence (P < 0.001) increased significantly after intervention in students. 95% of students agreed/strongly agreed that this method enhances their ability to answer people's questions. From an instructor's point of view, students had 93.1% of the ability to reason and analyze information after intervention and 88.5% of the ability to think critically.
conclusionThe results of the study showed that the use of debate in the classroom is an effective way to present content. The process of evaluating data-driven arguments promotes higher-level cognitive skills and teaches students about the knowledge base and the use of scientific databases.
trial registrationRegistration date: 21/11/2022, Registration number: IRCT20141128020129N3.
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.