MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742236764 · doi:10.2196/resprot.7414

Impact of a Tutored Theoretical-Practical Training to Develop Undergraduate Students’ Skills for the Detection of Caries Lesions: Study Protocol for a Multicenter Controlled Randomized Study

2017· article· en· W2742236764 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mariana Minatel Braga, Tathiane Larissa Lenzi, Fernanda Rosche Ferreira, Fausto Medeiros Mendes, Daniela Prócida Raggio, José Carlos Pettorossi Imparato, Marcelo Bönecker, Ana Carolina Magalhães, Linda Wang, Daniela Ríos, Juliano Pelim Pessan, Cristiane Duque, Maria Augusta Bessa Rebelo, Ary de Oliveira Alves Filho, Marina de Deus Moura de Lima, Marcoeli Silva de Moura, Alessandro Diogo De‐Carli, Mariane Emi Sanabe, Maximiliano Sérgio Cenci, Elenara Ferreira de Oliveira, Marcos Britto Corrêa, Rachel de Oliveira Rocha, Júlio Eduardo do Amaral Zenkner, Pedroza Uribe Murisí, Stefanía Martignon, Juan Sebastián Lara, Fatima Gabriela Aquino, Alfredo Carrillo, Chris Deery, David Ricketts, Paulo Melo, José Leopoldo Ferreira Antunes, Kim Ekstrand

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Research and COVID-19
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsProtocol (science)Medical educationRandomized controlled trialMedical physicsMedicineMulticenter studyPsychologyComputer scienceAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tutored laboratorial activities could be a manner of improving the competency development of students. However, its impact over conventional theoretical classes has not yet been tested. Additionally, different university contexts could influence this issue and should be explored. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a tutored theoretical-practical training for teaching undergraduate students to detect caries lesions as compared with theoretical teaching activities. The impact of these teaching/learning activities will be assessed in terms of efficacy, cost/benefit, retention of knowledge/acquired competences, and student acceptability. METHODS: Sixteen centers (7 centers from Brazil and 9 centers from other countries throughout the world) are involved in the inclusion of subjects for this protocol. A randomized controlled study with parallel groups will be conducted. One group (control) will be exposed to a 60- to 90-minute conventional theoretical class and the other group (test) will be exposed to the same theoretical class and also a 90-minute laboratory class, including exercises and discussions based on the evaluation of a pool of images and extracted teeth. The mentioned outcomes will be evaluated immediately after the teaching activities and also in medium- and long-term analyses. To compare the long-term outcomes, students who enrolled in the university before the participating students will be interviewed for data collection and these data will be used as a control and compared with the trained group. This stage will be a nonrandomized phase of this study, nested in the main study. Appropriate statistical analysis will be performed according to the aims of this study. Variables related to the centers will also be analyzed and used to model adjustment as possible sources of variability among results. RESULTS: This ongoing study is funded by a Brazilian national funding agency (CNPq- 400736/2014-4). We expect that the tutored theoretical-practical training will improve the undergraduate students' performance in the detection of caries lesions and subsequent treatment decisions, mainly in terms of long-term retention of knowledge. Our hypothesis is that tutored theoretical-practical training is a more cost-effective option for teaching undergraduate students to detect caries lesions. CONCLUSIONS: If our hypothesis is confirmed, the use of laboratory training in conjunction with theoretical classes could be used as an educational strategy in Cariology to improve the development of undergraduate students' skills in the detection of caries lesions and clinical decision-making.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.314
GPT teacher head0.649
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicDental Research and COVID-19French-language works237,207