Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40251621›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2025

Knowledge acquisition and student perceptions of three teaching methods: a randomized trial of live, flipped, and interactive flipped classrooms.

Omar Al-Karadsheh, Huda Abutayyem, Ayeh Saidi, Abdelrahman Shqaidef

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Omar Al-KaradshehDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Periodontology, School of Dentistry, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. O.karadsheh@ju.edu.jo.
Huda AbutayyemDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Center of Medical and Bio-Allied Health Sciences Research, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, UAE.
Ayeh SaidiDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Center of Medical and Bio-Allied Health Sciences Research, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, UAE.
Abdelrahman ShqaidefDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Center of Medical and Bio-Allied Health Sciences Research, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, UAE.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditional lecture-based learning has been the cornerstone of dental education; however, active learning strategies such as flipped classrooms are gaining popularity for their potential to enhance student engagement and performance. This study evaluated the effectiveness of three teaching methods-traditional live lectures, flipped video classrooms, and interactive flipped classrooms-on improving academic performance and student perceptions among fourth-year dental students.

methodsThis study employed a stratified randomization design involving 156 fourth-year dental students using a single lecture in an undergraduate orthodontics course. The students were first grouped into four categories based on their Grade Point Average (GPA): Excellent, Very Good, Good, and Satisfactory. From these groups, students were randomly drawn and placed into one of three intervention groups: live lecture, flipped classroom with video lectures, and flipped classroom with interactive video lectures. Pre- and post-intervention assessments evaluated knowledge improvement, while objective structured assessments measured academic performance. Student perceptions were gauged using validated Likert-scale questionnaires. Paired t-tests assessed within-group differences, and ANOVA compared effectiveness across teaching methods. Pearson's correlation analysis examined the relationship between academic performance and GPA of the students.

resultsAll three teaching methods showed significant improvements in post-intervention scores (p < 0.001). The Live Lecture Group had the greatest mean improvement (27.69), followed by the Flipped Video Lecture Group (27.30) and the Flipped Interactive Lecture Group (27.11). However, ANOVA revealed no statistically significant differences between the groups (F (2, 153) = 0.007, p = 0.993). Female students performed better in the live lecture setting (32.60 ± 25.08) compared to males (23.79 ± 21.44). Students with lower GPAs benefited most from the interactive flipped classroom, Pearson's correlation indicated a strong positive association between GPA and post-intervention scores (r = 0.708, p < 0.001). Student satisfaction was highest in the interactive flipped classroom, with 97.7% rating the experience as "Excellent" or "Very Good."

conclusionsAll three teaching methods led to significant improvement in post-test scores. While students reported higher engagement and satisfaction in flipped and interactive flipped lectures, the live lecture method was also effective for knowledge retention. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring educational strategies to diverse student needs in dental education. Educators should consider a blended model that integrates flipped and traditional strategies selectively, balancing feasibility with student needs, as developing multiple formats can be time-intensive with only modest differences in outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

Indexed as

Education, DentalOrthodonticsProblem-Based LearningStudents, DentalEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansMaleTeachingDental educationFlipped classroomStudent performanceStudent satisfactionTeaching methods

Identifiers

PMID40251621
PMCPMC12008932

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.