ArticleBMC medical education2026
The influence of anti-involution training on the critical thinking of young healthcare professionals in dental outpatient clinics: a pre-post quasi-experimental study.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluates changes in critical thinking among dental healthcare workers after anti-involution training (AIT) and identifies key predictors of training effectiveness.
methodsA pre-post quasi-experimental design was conducted with 91 participants. Critical thinking was assessed using the CTDI-CV scale. Spearman correlation, multiple linear regression, and LASSO regression were employed to identify predictors, with machine learning models (Random Forest) used for nonlinear exploration and validation.
resultsAIT significantly improved critical thinking disposition, with a mean total score increase of 11.813 ± 6.752 (P = 0.001). Cognitive maturity showed the greatest improvement (3.978 ± 6.645, P = 0.004). Multiple linear regression revealed that truth-seeking (β=-1.738, P = 0.019) negatively predicted improvement, while cognitive maturity (β = 1.467, P = 0.016) positively predicted improvement. Random Forest validated these findings (AUC = 0.889).
conclusionsAIT effectively enhances critical thinking among dental professionals. Baseline truth-seeking and cognitive maturity are key predictors of training outcomes, informing personalized educational strategies.
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.