MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413226113 · doi:10.2196/71743

Enhancing Preclinical Training for Removable Partial Dentures Through Participatory 3D Simulation: Development and Usability Study

2025· article· en· W4413226113 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yikchi Siu, Hefei Bai, Jung‐min Yoon, Hongqiang Ye, Yunsong Liu, Yongsheng Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Research and COVID-19
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityPreprintComputer scienceDenturesHuman–computer interactionDentistryMedicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The integration of digital technology in dental education has been recognized for its potential to address the challenges in training removable partial denture (RPD) design. RPD framework design is crucial to long-term success in the treatment of dentition defects, but traditional training methods often fall short of adequately preparing students for real-world applications. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a 3D simulation-based preclinical training software for RPDs in enhancing learning outcomes among first-year stomatology master's students, while also assessing user perceptions among students and faculty. Methods: RTS (Yikchi Siu) is a preclinical training software that simulates the clinical process of treating patients with partial edentulism. In this study, 26 newly enrolled master's degree students in stomatology who volunteered to participate were randomly divided into a control group (n=13) and a training group (n=13). The training group used the RTS for 2 credit hours (90 min) of self-study, while the control group received theoretical lessons and case practice from an instructor. After 2 hours, both groups completed the theoretical knowledge and drawing tests for RPD simultaneously. Test results were evaluated and graded by 2 experts in prosthodontics. Both users and teachers filled out a questionnaire afterward about their training experience. Results: Participants in the training group obtained better final grades compared to controls (theoretical test: 88.8, SD 2.3; 85.7, SD 3.3, respectively; P=.01; drawing test: 89.8, SD 4.5; 85.1, SD 4.3, respectively; P=.01). The training group had a shorter completion time in the drawing test (12.6, SD 19 min; 17.7, SD 3 min, respectively; P<.001) but there were no significant differences in the completion times in the theoretical test (23.2, SD 2.2 min; 24.9, SD 2.8 min, respectively; P=.14). Students and faculty generally had a favorable opinion of the RTS. Conclusions: The effectiveness of the RTS for newly enrolled master's degree students in stomatology to understand and apply their knowledge of RPD framework design was validated; the system was well received by both students and faculty members, who reported that it improved the effectiveness and convenience of teaching.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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