ArticleBDJ open2026
The 10-year evolution of a dental undergraduate 'Blended Learning' suturing programme.
Article in BDJ open, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUndergraduate dental students in the United Kingdom must be competent in intra-oral suturing before graduating. In 2014, a blended learning programme was introduced to enhance suturing teaching.
methodsStudents first completed an online suturing tutorial. This was designed for them to review at their own pace, promoted self-directed learning and provided a degree of standardisation in theoretical knowledge. Subsequently, students attended a practical session using simulation aids, translating theory into practice and promoting deeper learning. Staff offered guidance in these sessions and students undertook peer evaluation. Mixed methods action research was used iteratively to study student evaluation from the programme over a decade.
results745 undergraduate student responses were evaluated. These influenced adaptations to the programme such as introducing teaching earlier in the undergraduate programme, mounting suturing foam pads into a phantom head, and extending the duration of the session. 2024 results demonstrated 98% of students felt competent to handle the suture needle, and 95% felt prepared to apply these skills on a patient after completing the programme.
conclusionsStudent evaluation over a decade has driven continuous development of the programme. Our study demonstrates incremental changes have enriched the learning experience and preparedness for clinical practice.
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.