This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
INTRODUCTION: The objective of the study was to compare a dental student's practical ability to detect and stage radiographic caries per International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS), following a traditional lecture and a lecture containing an interactive session using an audience response system (ARS). Associations between the order of instructions and student performance were also evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-three dental students were randomly assigned to groups A and B. On the first day, group A received a traditional lecture and group B received content using the ARS. All students then took an electronic quiz (T1) identifying and staging caries on radiographs per ICDAS. For the second day, group A received the content using the ARS system and group B received a traditional lecture. All students subsequently took a second electronic quiz (T2). Two survey questions about the learning experience were also included. RESULTS: Wilcoxon rank-sum analysis of scores from consenting students (81) showed no difference between the quiz 1 scores of two groups (p=.61). Whilst not statistically significant (p = .07), the group that had the ARS initially scored marginally higher on quiz 2. Survey results showed that most participants preferred either the ARS alone (49.38%) or a combination of the ARS and a traditional lecture (40.74%). A majority of them (80%) found the ARS helpful. CONCLUSION: When training students in practical skills of detection and staging radiographic presence of dental caries per ICDAS, hands-on learning tools, such as an ARS, complement traditional lectures.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anamali et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: