What question did this study set out to answer?

May 14, 2026Open Access

Perception and academic challenges regarding dentistry among preclinical dental students: A cross-sectional comparative study

RBRuchita Prakash BaraiACPM Dental College and Hospital JJJayashree Prabhakar JoshiACPM Dental College and Hospital AKAnita KaharACPM Dental College and Hospital

Key Points

The study aims to assess perceptions and challenges regarding dentistry among preclinical dental students and compare these between different year cohorts.
Cross-sectional study surveying 235 preclinical dental students using a validated questionnaire circulated via Google Form.
Questionnaire included dichotomous questions and a 5-point Likert scale to assess perceptions and challenges.
Chi-square test was applied to evaluate associations between responses of 1st and 2nd-year students.
1st-year students were significantly more likely to disagree that anatomy was easy to grasp compared to 2nd-year students (p < 0.05).
2nd-year students reported higher psychological support from senior students than 1st-year students (p = 0.046).
Findings indicate varying levels of academic understanding and the importance of mentorship in easing transitions for dental students.

Abstract

Objectives: To assess perception and challenges regarding dentistry among preclinical dental students. To do the comparative evaluation of perception and challenges regarding dentistry between 1 st and 2 nd -year dental students. Material and Methods: A validated questionnaire was circulated through Google Form and responses were recorded for a sample size of 235. The questionnaire consisted of 10 multiple-choice questions based on a dichotomous key pattern and other 10 were based on 5-point Likert scale. The study was completed within a duration of 6 months and it was conducted at the joining of preclinical dental students. The data were tabulated using the software IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Statistics 20. Chi-square test was used to check the association between the responses of 1 st and 2 nd year’s p -value ( p < 0.05), showing a significant association between the responses of 1 st and 2 nd -year students. Results: The comparative analysis of 1 st and 2 nd -year students’ responses showed that 1 st -year students ( p < 0.05) were more likely to disagree that anatomy was easy to grasp as compared to 2 nd -year students. This difference may be attributed to the initial exposure and complexity of the subject, which likely eases with progression in the course and increased familiarity. Another comparison showed that 2 nd -year students’ interaction with seniors helped them more psychologically ( p = 0. 046) than 1 st -year students which highlights the importance of mentorship and peer guidance in easing psychological challenges, especially during the transition period in dental education. Conclusion: The results indicated that both academic understanding and peer support varied across the two groups. It highlights the need for strategic curriculum planning, orientation programs to familiarize students with the dental curriculum, learning strategies, and interaction with seniors can help to bridge the gap and spark interest in students.

Perguntar à IA

Bookmark

View Full Paper