Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40296102›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

Factors influencing the agreement between teachers and students in the assessment of preclinical endodontics using a rubric.

B Baracco, N Escribano, D Da Silva, V Belliard, L Ceballos, V Fuentes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

B BaraccoFaculty of Health Sciences, IDIBO Research Group, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
N EscribanoFaculty of Health Sciences, IDIBO Research Group, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain. nuria.escribano@urjc.es.
D Da SilvaFaculty of Health Sciences, IDIBO Research Group, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
V BelliardFaculty of Health Sciences, IDIBO Research Group, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
L CeballosFaculty of Health Sciences, IDIBO Research Group, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
V FuentesFaculty of Health Sciences, IDIBO Research Group, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudents' self-assessment and rubrics are pedagogical tools designed to enhance learning and evaluation processes. Achieving convergence between learners and teachers is paramount during the learning of complex treatments such as endodontic procedures, although it can be challenging due to uncontrollable factors that may affect task performance and perception. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of various factors (anatomical difficulty, type of instrumentation system, and training level) on the assessments of root canal treatments (RCT) by teachers and students using a rubric, and to determine the degree of agreement between them.

methods144 RCT were performed on extracted human molars by 36 dental students using two mechanized systems and subsequently evaluated using a rubric by both the students and four teachers. Rubric yielded a total score for the sum of 4 items analyzed individually: radiographic evaluation, access cavity, instrumentation, and obturation. The influence of the three following factors: anatomical difficulty (categories: minimal, moderate and high), instrumentation system (categories: Protaper Next and Reciproc Blue), and training level (categories: initial and advanced) on teachers' and students' RCT total scores and for each item were analyzed by three-way ANOVA. Agreements between teachers and students were measured by intraclass correlation coefficients and quadratic weighted Kappa. Statistical analyses were conducted at a pre-set alpha of 0.05 using Stata 16.

resultsNo significant influence of anatomical difficulty, instrumentation system, or training level was observed on RCT total scores given by teachers and students (p > 0.05). However, training level influenced the assessments by teachers in instrumentation as those by students in radiographic evaluation. Agreement was moderate for RCT total scores and substantial for teeth with minimal or high difficulty, after using Protaper Next, and at the initial training level. Agreement was substantial in obturation, and moderate in radiographic evaluation, access cavity, and instrumentation. Some categories in instrumentation and obturation items showed substantial agreement, while fair agreement was observed only in access cavity.

conclusionsEducational factors in Endodontics such as anatomical difficulty, mechanized instrumentation system, and level of training did not influence the total scores of preclinical RCT by teachers or students. Agreement for RCT total scores ranged from moderate to substantial. The strongest agreement was observed in obturation, while access cavity yielded the lowest. The rubric as an assessment tool in Endodontics teaching is recommended.

Indexed as

Educational MeasurementEducation, DentalEndodonticsFaculty, DentalRoot Canal TherapyStudents, DentalClinical CompetenceHumansMaleAgreementAnatomical difficultyDental educationEndodontics trainingRoot Canal treatmentRubricSelf-assessment

Identifiers

PMID40296102
PMCPMC12039150

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.