ReviewThe Japanese dental science review2025
Learning Styles in undergraduate dentistry students: A systematic review.
Review in The Japanese dental science review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Learning approaches and their association with academic performance among undergraduate students in a dental teaching institution in India.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
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
Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of Learning Styles (LS) among undergraduate dentistry students (UDS). Method: Cochrane manual's methodology and PRISMA statement were used. Four databases were searched, and the studies were selected based on eligibility criteria. The search strategy was Results: A total of 30 articles were included, 17 of which used the Visual, Aural, Read-write and Kinesthetic (VARK) questionnaire, 8 the Kolb LS Inventory (LSI), 3 the Honey-Alonso questionnaire (CHAEA) and 3 the Felder and Solomon LS index (ILS). The studies that allowed us to extract all the necessary data to calculate the global percentages for each instrument were grouped together. For VARK, LSI, CHAEA and ILS the highest number and percentage of learning styles were 1089 (50.4 %) multimodal, 518 (32.7 %) divergent, 239 (46.7 %) reflectors and 107 (64.8 %) active, 130 (78.8 %) sensitive, 138 (83.6 %) visual and 106 (64.3 %) sequential, respectively. Conclusions: There is a tendency for multimodal, divergent and reflective LS to increase among clinical students, unlike initial and preclinical dentistry students, who lean towards unimodal, convergent and theoretical LS. This dynamism in LS could be influenced by the different methodologies strategies used in the preclinical and clinical courses.
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.