ArticleFrontiers in dental medicine2026
Evaluating digital resources as a supplement to traditional anatomy teaching in dental education.
Article in Frontiers in dental medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Oral macroscopic anatomy forms a core component of dental education, requiring both detailed factual knowledge and the ability to recognize complex three-dimensional structures. This study evaluated whether structured digital learning supplements, introduced alongside traditional teaching, improved short-term learning outcomes and long-term knowledge retention among dental students. Materials and methods: Four student cohorts from the Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, were included. Two earlier cohorts (2016 and 2017; Results: Students with access to digital supplements achieved markedly higher scores in the second-year practical examination across osteology and macroscopic anatomy tasks. This performance advantage persisted 2.5 years later during the fifth-year dissection course, indicating enhanced long-term retention. Survey data showed extensive use of digital materials during the second year, with students reporting that the resources improved their understanding and supported examination preparation. Although overall use declined by the fifth year, many students revisited the digital resources when they needed repetition in preparation for clinical activities, such as surgical procedures. Conclusion: Structured digital supplements meaningfully enhanced traditional teaching in oral macroscopic anatomy, improving initial learning outcomes and supporting retention well into clinical training. Digital tools provided flexible, self-paced opportunities for repetition and active recall, while hands-on work with physical models and specimens remained essential. These findings support a blended learning approach in which digital resources complement, but do not replace, practical anatomy teaching.
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.