ArticleJournal of dental education2025
An Open-Source, AI-Supported Teaching Tool in Orthodontic Education-Assessment of Acceptance and Effectiveness.
Article in Journal of dental education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utilising a web-based e-learning platform for orthodontic case analysis training: a randomised controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Assessing and optimizing Team-Based Learning in undergraduate cosmetic dermatology education: an empirical study using interpretable machine learning.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- An Open-Source, AI-Supported Teaching Tool in Orthodontic Education-Assessment of Acceptance and Effectiveness.Journal of dental education · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and acceptance of an AI-supported teaching tool for cephalometric tracing in orthodontic education. Munich Cephalometric Application for Training (MCAT) was introduced to students from two consecutive semesters. Participants were given access to independently train on their own computers. Finally, they submitted the results of three manually traced radiographs. To evaluate the effectiveness, their measurements were compared with those of students from another semester who did not have access to the application. The acceptance was assessed using a questionnaire. Students who used MCAT demonstrated reduced variability in their tracings, with a lower interquartile range compared to the control group. Significant improvements were noted for specific cephalometric variables. The tool was positively received, with 86.5% of the participants perceiving greater learning outcomes for themselves when working with MCAT. MCAT effectively enhances cephalometric tracing skills and is well-accepted by students, supporting its integration into orthodontic curricula.
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.