Depth and Distance Perception of Dentists and Dental Students
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The quality of work carried out by dentists is dependent, among other things, on experience, training, and manual dexterity. Historical focus on the latter as a predictor of dental performance has failed to recognize that dental competence also requires good perceptual and visual skills, not only for gathering information but also for judging positions, distances, and the size of objects and shapes. Most predictive tests ignore visual and interpretative deficiencies that could make individual acquisition of skills and interpretation of instructions difficult. Ability to estimate depth and distance, the manner in which students learn this ability, whether and how it can be taught, or whether there is an association among ability, stereopsis, and dental performance has not been thoroughly examined; nor has the perception that dental students fully understand verbal and written instruction relating to depth and distance. This study investigated the ability of dentists and dental students to estimate and reproduce small depths and distances and the relationship of this ability to stereopsis, dental experience, and student performance. A total of 163 undergraduate dental students from three year groups and 20 experienced dentists and specialists performed three tasks. A depth-perception task involved estimation of the depth of two sets (2-mm or 4-mm wide) of nine computer milled slots ranging in depth from 0.5 to 4.0 mm. A distance task involved estimation of the width of specially prepared printed square blocks. In a writing task, participants recorded distances across a printed line on separate sheets of paper. All tasks were conducted at set positions in custom-made transportable light boxes. Stereopsis and visual acuity were also measured. Ability to perform perceptual tasks varied enormously, with the level of accuracy dependent on the type of task and dental experience. Many students had considerable difficulty in estimating depth. Inexperienced students performed poorly. Most participants overestimated depth and distance estimation tasks, but underestimated when required to draw distances. Smaller depths and distances were easier to estimate than larger ones. All groups overestimated depth more in 4-mm-wide blocks than in 2-mm-wide blocks. There was no correlation found between depth and distance estimation and stereopsis scores or with the overall grades tested. This study highlights that some dentists and many dental students, particularly early in their course, have great difficulty in accurately gauging depths and distances. It is proposed that that this could impact significantly on a student's ability to interpret verbal and written preclinical instruction and could make the acquisition of manual skills and interpretation of clinical instruction difficult. Routine testing of all undergraduate dental students for perceptual and visual difficulties is recommended, so that those with difficulties can be identified and problems remedied, if possible, early in their course.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».