ArticleBMC medical education2026
Investigation of the effect of flipped learning on neuroanatomy education in dentistry faculty students.
Article 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFlipped learning is a learning model in which students are active and effective. This study is a quasi-experimental study conducted using a pretest-posttest-follow-up test design with experimental and control groups to evaluate the effect of flipped learning on the education of second-year dental students regarding the facial nerve in neuroanatomy.
methodsThe study was conducted with 59 students in the experimental (n = 28) and control (n = 31) groups in the 2nd year of Giresun University Faculty of Dentistry. Data were collected using the "Student Demographic Characteristics Form", "Facial Nerve Anatomy Knowledge Test", and "Flipped Learning Feedback Form". Students in the experimental group were trained using the flipped learning method prepared by the researchers. Students in the control group were trained using the traditional education method. Permission and ethical approval were obtained from the institution where the study was conducted (19.03.2025, no:2025/47).
resultsA statistically significant difference was found between the pretest, posttest, and follow-up test scores on the facial nerve anatomy knowledge test for students in the experimental group (p = 0.000). A statistically significant difference was also found between the pretest, posttest, and follow-up test scores for students in the control group (p = 0.022). However, no statistically significant difference was found between the experimental and control groups across all three tests (p > 0.05). Students in the experimental group rated the benefits of the flipped learning method as beneficial, with a median value of 4 (3-4).
conclusionIn this study, both flipped learning and the traditional teaching method significantly improved students' knowledge of facial nerve anatomy. However, no statistically significant difference was found between the groups. As a student-centered approach, flipped learning can serve as a complementary method to traditional anatomy 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.