Trial reportBMC medical education2026
Application of retrospective teaching method in stomatology undergraduate education.
Trial report in BMC medical 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUndergraduate orthodontic education requires students to integrate multiple diagnostic sources and develop individualized treatment plans, yet lecture-based learning may limit opportunities for integrating theoretical knowledge with clinical practice. This study evaluated the effectiveness of a case review-based clinical learning improving academic performance and learning-related outcomes.
methodsForty-two undergraduate orthodontic students were randomly assigned to either a case review-based learning group (experimental, n = 21) or a lecture-based learning group (control, n = 21). The experimental group engaged with complete patient cases in a stepwise, longitudinal format, linking each stage from consultation and record-taking to appliance therapy and retention with underlying theoretical knowledge. The same group of instructors delivered both teaching interventions using an identical curriculum and teaching schedule. Academic performance was assessed via orthodontic examination scores. Additional outcomes included self-reported learning interest and self-directed learning ability.
resultsStudents in the experimental group achieved significantly higher orthodontic examination scores than those in the control group (95.2 ± 1.7 vs. 66.2 ± 3.5, p < 0.001). The experimental group also reported significantly higher ratings for the appropriateness of course design (9.71 ± 1.27 vs. 7.29 ± 1.31, p < 0.001) and overall satisfaction (9.05 ± 0.80 vs. 6.76 ± 1.18, p < 0.001). In addition, 9 of 10 instructor members (90%) expressed willingness to adopt the structured case-based learning approach in future skills teaching, compared with 1 of 10 (10%) for the lecture-based learning.
conclusionsThe case-based learning was associated with improved academic performance, learning interest, and self-directed learning among undergraduate orthodontic students. Integrating complete clinical cases in a stepwise, longitudinal manner may provide a useful pedagogical approach for bridging theoretical knowledge with clinical practice in orthodontic education.
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.