ArticleCureus2026
Evaluating the Flipped Classroom Approach for Enhancing Orthodontic and Cephalometric Competencies in Dental Undergraduates: A Quasi-experimental, Non-randomized Study.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond the typodont: deliberate practice, experiential learning, and feedback in postgraduate orthodontic education.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
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
Background and objective Cephalometric analysis is a critical component of orthodontic diagnosis, requiring precise measurements, interpretation, and practical application. Traditional lecture-based instruction may not fully engage students or foster the analytical and problem-solving skills necessary for clinical practice. The flipped classroom model, which integrates pre-class learning with interactive in-class activities, provides a potentially more effective approach. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the flipped classroom model versus traditional lectures in improving knowledge, engagement, and satisfaction among undergraduate dental students studying cephalometric analysis. Methods A quasi-experimental, non-randomized, two-group pre-test/post-test design was used, involving 72 final-year undergraduate dental students. Participants were evenly assigned to a control group (traditional lecture) and an experimental group (flipped classroom). The flipped classroom group received pre-class instructional videos, guided reading materials, and a self-assessment quiz, followed by an interactive session featuring case-based discussions, hands-on tracing, and peer teaching. The control group received a conventional lecture covering the same content. Outcomes measured included knowledge gain (assessed using multiple-choice questions (MCQs) and clinical scenario questions) and engagement/satisfaction (assessed using a Likert-scale questionnaire). Statistical analysis was conducted using paired and independent t-tests, two-way ANOVA, and effect size calculations. Results The flipped classroom group achieved significantly higher post-test scores (mean = 7.69, standard deviation (SD) = 0.67) compared to the lecture group (mean = 5.28, SD = 1.21), t(70) = 10.49, p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 2.47. No significant gender differences were found, and no interaction between model and gender was observed. Engagement and satisfaction scores were markedly higher in the flipped group. Conclusions The flipped classroom model led to significant improvements in cognitive outcomes, knowledge retention, engagement, and student satisfaction compared to traditional lectures. Its learner-centered, active approach is particularly well-suited for complex orthodontic topics and has the potential for broader implementation in dental 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.