MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361272842 · doi:10.2196/46305

The Relation Between Students’ Theoretical Knowledge and Practical Skills in Endodontics: Retrospective Analysis

2023· article· en· W4361272842 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Franziska Haupt, Philipp Kanzow

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumEndodonticsTest (biology)Wilcoxon signed-rank testMedical educationMathematics educationPsychologySkills managementDentistryMedicinePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dental undergraduate students are required to show sufficient practical skills prior to treating patients. Practical skills and the underlying theoretical knowledge are taught in preclinical courses. Usually, the learning outcome is assessed in written multiple-choice examinations (theoretical knowledge) and practical skills tests. However, students' assessment of practical skills is more time consuming and prone to bias than objective multiple-choice examinations. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the relation between students' theoretical knowledge and practical skills in endodontics. Furthermore, the predictive validity of a theoretical knowledge assessment on students' practical skills was assessed. METHODS: Examination results from all students who participated in the preclinical phantom course in Operative Dentistry (sixth semester of the undergraduate dental curriculum in Germany) between the 2015 summer term and the 2022 summer term were retrospectively evaluated (N=447). The effects of age, sex, previous course participation, and theoretical knowledge on students' practical skills were assessed, using Pearson correlations, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and a linear regression analysis. Subsequently, students' theoretical knowledge and practical skills were compared via a Fisher exact test to identify a suitable pass mark for students' theoretical knowledge that was associated with sufficient practical skills (≥60%). RESULTS: =.02; r=0.13). By using the current pass mark for theoretical knowledge (ie, 60%), a significant differentiation between insufficient practical skills (<60%) and sufficient practical skills (≥60%) was achieved (P=.02). However, for the discrimination between students with sufficient practical skills and students with insufficient practical skills, an adapted pass mark for theoretical knowledge would be more appropriate. The ideal pass mark amounted to 58% (P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Students' practical skills and theoretical knowledge are significantly correlated. By objectively measuring students' theoretical knowledge, a rough estimation of students' practical skills (ie, a differentiation between sufficient and insufficient practical skills) is possible.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.498 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207