Trial reportBMC medical education2025
A PBL-, CBL-, and seminar-based blended teaching model for chairside instruction of undergraduate dental students: a randomized controlled trial.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- DeepSeek-assisted problem-based learning for glaucoma education in an undergraduate ophthalmology clerkship: a randomized educational pilot study.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Efficacy of a hybrid case-based learning and simulated clinical encounter model versus lecture-based learning in dental education.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- AI-Augmented Teach-Back in Dentistry: From Patient Education to Verified Clinical Understanding.Cureus · 2026Review
- A systematic seminar-based model improves learning and research competence in an immunology graduate course: a quasi-experimental mixed-methods study.Frontiers in 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis research aimed to evaluate the effect of a blended method combined with PBL, CBL and seminar methods in Operative Dentistry and Endodontics chairside teaching course on the level of theoretical scores, practical scores, teaching satisfaction, and student competence among dental undergraduate students.
methodsA 12-week randomized controlled trial of chairside teaching was conducted from September 2022 to September 2024, involving 58 fourth-year undergraduate dental students from Kunming Medical University, who were randomized to either an experimental group (PBL, CBL and seminar) or a control group (LBL). Objective assessments were carried out using the Mini-CEX and DOPS scales, whereas subjective outcomes (including evaluations of teaching model, internship effectiveness, and learning satisfaction) were measured via a validated questionnaire.
resultsAfter 12 weeks of clinical chairside teaching, compared with the control group, the experimental group obtained higher scores in interviewing skills (6.90 ± 0.94 vs. 6.21 ± 1.15, p < 0.05), humanistic qualities (7.14 ± 1.13 vs. 6.14 ± 1.25, p < 0.05), counseling skills (7.24 ± 1.15 vs. 6.38 ± 1.18, p < 0.05), preoperative preparation (7.24 ± 0.99 vs. 6.14 ± 0.83, p < 0.05), correct and standardized procedural steps (7.10 ± 1.08 vs. 6.34 ± 0.81, p < 0.05), and postoperative management (7.07 ± 1.09 vs. 6.24 ± 0.83, p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in clinical judgement and accurate and skilled technique (p > 0.05). For questionnaire response, the experimental group achieved significantly higher scores than the control group in teaching mode evaluation (38.28 ± 2.67 vs. 35.34 ± 6.13, p < 0.05), self-evaluation of internship effect (25.55 ± 4.13 vs. 23.14 ± 4.17, p < 0.05), and internship satisfaction evaluation (29.34 ± 1.12 vs. 27.62 ± 3.99, p < 0.05).
conclusionThe blended teaching model in Operative Dentistry and Endodontics chairside teaching enables efficient use of limited resources to support skill development. It also effectively enhances standardized clinical operations, teaching quality, and students’ subjective evaluations. Although no significant improvement was found in clinical judgment or technical proficiency, these areas offer potential for future focus. However, due to factors such as sample size, caution should be exercised when generalizing these findings to other educational contexts.
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.