MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3158480813 · doi:10.2196/25506

Remote Teaching in a Preclinical Phantom Course in Operative Dentistry During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Observational Case Study

2021· article· en· W3158480813 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Philipp Kanzow, Christiane Krantz-Schäfers, Michael Hülsmann

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Medical Education · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineDentistry
ThématiqueDental Research and COVID-19
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesGeorg-August-Universität Göttingen
Mots-clésCurriculumDistance educationMedical educationSummative assessmentCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyAsynchronous learningTeaching methodMedicineComputer scienceMathematics educationPedagogyFormative assessment

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: During the acute COVID-19 pandemic, physical access to the University Medical Center Göttingen was restricted for students. For the first time at our dental school, theoretical knowledge was imparted to students via asynchronous online screencasts and discussed via synchronous video meetings only. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the acceptance and effectiveness of distance education as a new teaching format for theoretical knowledge within the preclinical course in Operative Dentistry (sixth semester of the undergraduate dental curriculum in Germany). METHODS: The phantom course comprised distance education (first phase, 11 weeks) and subsequent on-site practical demonstrations and training (second phase, 10 weeks). All theoretical knowledge was taught via online screencasts during distance education (except for the first week, 3 screencasts were uploaded per week resulting in a total of 30 screencasts). Until the end of the term, all students (N=33) were able to view the screencasts for an unlimited number of times. Theoretical knowledge was assessed in a summative examination after practical on-site teaching. Acceptance and effectiveness of the new curriculum and distance education were also measured based on an evaluation survey and students' self-perceived learning outcome, which was compared to the outcome from the two pre-COVID-19 terms. RESULTS: Each screencast was viewed by a mean of 24 (SD 3.3) students and accessed a mean of 5.6 (SD 1.2) times per user (ie, by students who accessed the respective screencast at least once). During distance education, the number of accesses showed a linear trend over time. During the practical training phase, screencast views declined and increased again prior to the examination. Screencasts covering topics in Cariology, Restorative Dentistry, and Preventive Dentistry were viewed by more students than screencasts covering topics in Endodontology or Periodontology (both P=.047). Examination items in Periodontology showed inferior results compared to the other topics (P<.001). Within the different topics, students' self-perceived learning outcome did not differ from that during the pre-COVID-19 terms. Although most students agreed that the presented screencasts contributed to their learning outcome, pre-COVID-19 term students more strongly felt that lectures significantly contributed to their learning outcome (P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: Screencasts showed high acceptance and effectiveness among the students but were not used as a learning tool by all students. However, students who viewed the screencasts accessed each screencast more frequently than they could have attended a conventional lecture. Screencast views were mostly due to intrinsic motivation.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,057
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,021
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,159
Tête enseignante GPT0,549
Écart entre enseignants0,390 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations18
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Medical EducationMême sujetDental Research and COVID-19Travaux en français237 207