ArticleJournal of dental education2026
Comparative Analysis of Dental Anatomy Teaching Modalities' Effect on Preclinical Operative Psychomotor Performance.
Article in Journal of dental education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dental anatomy is fundamental in predoctoral dental education, providing essential knowledge that fosters good clinical practices. Although technology-enhanced teaching modalities have emerged in dental anatomy education, their comparative effectiveness in supporting the development of subsequent clinical skills remains inadequately explored. In this retrospective study, we compared three dental anatomy teaching modalities among first-year dental students (n = 326): traditional in-person instruction using human extracted teeth, alongside online and hybrid formats incorporating a 3D virtual tooth library. Learning outcomes were assessed through written examinations and preclinical operative skills evaluation, including Class I, II, and III cavity preparations; Class I and II amalgam restorations; and Class II, III, IV, and V composite restorations. ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc tests and Pearson's correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis (p < 0.05). While dental anatomy midterm scores showed no significant differences across modalities, traditional instruction yielded significantly higher final examination scores (92.04 ± 5.12) compared to online (86.59 ± 6.15) and hybrid (85.69 ± 6.77) formats (p < 0.05). Students receiving traditional instruction demonstrated superior cavity preparation skills (76.5 ± 9.75), whereas the hybrid cohort excelled in restoration techniques (78.4 ± 6.43). Correlation analyses showed weak associations (r < 0.20) between dental anatomy final scores and subsequent performance measures. These findings demonstrate the complementary nature of traditional and technology-enhanced instruction in dental education, while revealing that theoretical knowledge and practical skills are more distinct than previously assumed, suggesting a need for domain-specific teaching strategies that optimize each area independently.
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.