Trial reportBMC medical education2024
Comparison of case-based and lecture-based learning in dental fluorosis diagnostic ability with visual analog scale assessment.
Trial report 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.
- The effect of systematic aesthetic education of prosthodontics in undergraduate practical teaching - a randomized controlled study.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Efficacy of a hybrid case-based learning and simulated clinical encounter model versus lecture-based learning in dental education.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Application of PBL in combination with the SP teaching method in the clinical teaching of orthopedics and traumatology.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Article
- Temporomandibular disorder clinical practice teaching through case-based learning with the symptom "limited mouth opening": a pilot study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Article
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
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the impact of case-based learning (CBL) versus lecture-based learning (LBL) on dental students' clinical decision-making regarding DF severity using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scoring.
methodsEighty first-year graduate dental students were randomly assigned to either the CBL (n = 38) or LBL (n = 42) groups. Both groups received instruction on DF diagnosis, with CBL involving small group sessions analyzing real cases and LBL involving traditional lectures. Effectiveness was assessed by presenting 32 dental fluorosis cases with Thylstrup-Fejerskov Index (TSIF) scores ranging from 0 to 7 through slide presentations to both groups for VAS assessment. Five evaluators of each group randomly selected were asked to repeat the rating 2 weeks later. Statistical analysis included two-way ANOVA for group and gender differences, intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for reliability, and Spearman correlation coefficients for validity.
resultsVariations in VAS scores were observed between CBL and LBL groups, with no significant gender impact. Excellent inter- and intra-evaluator agreement was found for VAS scoring in both groups, indicating its reliability. Validation against established indices (such as DI and TSIF) demonstrated strong correlations, with CBL students exhibiting higher correlations.
conclusionsCBL enhances students' clinical decision-making and proficiency in DF diagnosis, as evidenced by more consistent and accurate VAS scoring compared to LBL. These findings highlight the importance of innovative educational strategies in dental curricula, with implications for improving training quality and clinical outcomes.
trial registrationThe study was registered at the Clinical Research Center, Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University (Registration code: HGGC-036).
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.