ArticlePloS one2025
Using an analytic rubric system for the evaluation of anterior ceramic crown preparation performed by preclinical dental students.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Rubric use in dental education: a systematic review of design, implementation, and educational impact.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Validity and Reliability of Rubrics for Assessment of Preclinical Orthodontic Practices in Dental Students.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Assessing the reliability and validity of a standardized rubric for staff evaluation of all-ceramic crown preparations at preclinical setting.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Preclinical Class II Composite Restoration Performed by Dental Students Using Analytic Rubric Parameters.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- Inter-rater reliability of global and analytic assessment of prosthodontic procedures.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- A comparative study of student performance in all-ceramic crown preparation by clinical-phase students.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Precision dentistry in preclinical education: analytic rubrics for enhanced objectivity in metal-ceramic crown preparations.Frontiers in dental medicine · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to assess the performance of preclinical dental male and female students in performing maxillary anterior all-ceramic preparations using a validated analytic rubric system.
methodsAn analytical rubric for the assessment of maxillary anterior ceramic preparations was used in a preclinical phase study with two evaluators. The grading was based on a 4-point scale for all steps for crown preparation, and the total score was calculated out of 40 points. Differences in rubric parameter scores between male and female students were analyzed via an independent t test. Other tests, such as the kappa test and Pearson's correlation coefficient, were used to measure the associations among grade point average (GPA), evaluators, and gender participants, with p < 0.050 considered a cutoff point for statistical significance.
resultsThe study revealed that students of both genders demonstrated high performance, with females scoring a mean of 37.70 ± 1.61 (SD) and males scoring a mean of 36.50 ± 2.36 (SD). A significant difference in the average overall score was recorded by both evaluators (p = 0.034). The highest value was for intact gingival margins and surrounding tissues (3.89 ± 0.31 males, 3.92 ± 0.28 females), and the lowest value was for axial wall reduction (3.50 ± 0.36 males, 3.62 ± 0.42 females). Among the different parameters, only the finish line form parameter was significantly different (p = 0.011), as found by evaluator 1. Inter-rater reliability analysis revealed varying levels of agreement between the evaluators. Strong positive correlations were found between several rubric parameters, but students' GPA had a weak, nonsignificant correlation with their preclinical performance (p = 0.495).
conclusionThe analytic rubric revealed minor gender differences in preclinical performance, with female students performing slightly better. The rubric demonstrated varying inter-rater reliability and positive correlations across parameters. However, GPA showed limited correlation with preclinical performance.
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.