ArticleBrazilian dental journal2024
Quality of Communication Between Professors and University Students in the Process of Learning.
Article in Brazilian dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Restructuring Dentistry Studies on Student Stress and Satisfaction Regarding the Curriculum and Educational Methods.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- The emotional and motivational costs of poorly delivered academic feedback.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Teaching requires the incorporation of communication skills, and these potentials may affect the outcomes of the learning process. This study evaluated the quality of communication between professors and students during the process of learning Dentistry. A questionnaire was developed and applied to evaluate their perceptions about their communications in an undergraduate Dentistry course. The questionnaire had ten items to analyze professors' self-perception and ten for students' perceptions, using a Likert-like scale and a final open question. During its construction, it was sent to five specialists to analyze content validity. The open question gathered suggestions to improve and intensify communications effectively and to identify vulnerabilities. Total scores ranged from 10 to 50, with 10 as the worst perception, and 50, as the best. The scores were calculated by adding all answers and then dividing that sum by the total number of items. Cronbach's alpha was calculated to evaluate the instrument's internal consistency. The level of significance was set at 0.05%. The Student t-test was used to determine differences between groups. Professors' self-perceptions and students' perceptions of the quality of communication of the university teaching staff during the student's learning process had statistically significant differences. Professors classified their ability to communicate when emitting and receiving information as satisfactory. Students, however, did not fully agree with them, particularly on the items about receiving information. The perceptions identified in this study may lead to a new direction in the communicative behavior of professors and students.
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.