ArticleBMC medical education2024
Evaluation of the efficacy of a simulation model used in oral and maxillofacial surgery education.
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 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.
- Effect of preclinical training in periodontal instrumentation on undergraduate students' anxiety, clinical performance, satisfaction.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Knowledge acquisition and retention following small-group case-based learning combined with sheep head animal model training in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a single-arm quasi-experimental study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Immersive Reality-Based Training Simulator for Dental Extraction: Protocol for a Randomized Pilot Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Dentomaxillofacial Radiology Education: Innovations and Perspectives.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- An assessment of clinical reception training using standard patient and dental simulator in prosthodontic dentistry for dental undergraduates: a historical control trial.BMC medical education · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe traditional teaching methods of dental education are gradually being replaced with futuristic education methods based on the usage of educational tools such as mannequin-based simulation models and virtual reality. However, the effectiveness of mannequin-based simulation models as a learning method in the field of oral surgery remains unclear. This study aims to investigate the efficacy of training on a tooth extraction model (TEM) in view of undergraduate dental students' experience and perception of their education.
methodsA quasi-experimental trial was implemented with two consecutive year classes, totaling 136 students at the Dentistry Faculty of Altinbas University, Turkiye. Two cohorts were created from dental students in the classes of 2023 and 2022 graduates. Cohort 1 (n = 71) received 14 h of theoretical education followed by 10 h of preclinical education on TEM. Cohort 2 (n = 65) received only 14 h of theoretical education. An anonymous questionnaire was prepared with four main sections including the preferences of learning style, participants' perceptions of the preclinical training methods, the students' competency and free text comments. Students' opinions were quantified with both 7-point Likert scales and thematic analysis. Anxiety levels were measured with the interval scale of anxiety response (ISAR). Descriptive statistics, inferential statistical and thematic analyses were conducted according to survey responses. Student characteristics were summarized and compared for two cohorts using a t-test. For all statistical analyses, the significance level was set atP ≤ 0.05.
resultCohort 1 was more comfortable with sequential motions performed with the forceps (P = 0.033) and felt more ready for their first clinical tooth extraction experience (P = 0.028). Cohort 2 showed a significantly higher preference for textbooks among supplementary materials (P = 0.04); however, they tended to exhibit lower self-confidence and higher anxiety levels, though without any statistical significance (P > 0.05).
conclusionIt is clear that the students who have yet to start seeing patients benefit from increased practice with training models, which adequately reflect and represent real-life situations encountered in everyday practice.
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.