Impact of the Practice of Playing Video Games on Technical Skills Development in Preclinical Dental Education: Preliminary Cross-Sectional Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Video games are becoming increasingly accessible and occupy a prominent position among students' leisure activities. Recent studies have demonstrated that engagement with video games can facilitate the development of specific abilities, such as visuospatial skills and hand-eye coordination. Thus, it seemed relevant to investigate whether the practice of playing video games could enhance the technical capabilities of novice dental students. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to ascertain whether dental students who identified themselves as video game players exhibited differences in fundamental technical skills in comparison to students who identified as nonplayers. This preliminary study aimed to validate the methodology and measurement tools for a subsequent prospective study. METHODS: Second-year dental students who were novices in the field of preclinical dental practice were divided into 2 groups: one designated nonplayers and the other players. The visual, motor, and cognitive coordination of the students was assessed using 3 different tests. The initial assessment focused on evaluating spatial ability, while the subsequent assessments addressed arm-hand coordination and the velocity of execution. The study data were collected in September 2021. RESULTS: This study included 92 second-year dental students (mean age 19.49, SD 0.8 years). Thirty-seven students were placed in the player group (40%), while 55 were placed in the nonplayer group (60%). The findings showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups when the 3 distinct tests were administered. The nonplayer group made fewer mistakes on the test evaluating spatial ability (P=.051) and achieved a higher score on the modified Precision Manual Dexterity Test, which evaluates arm-hand coordination, compared to the player group (P=.17), but without statistical significance. The nonplayer group took more time to perform the pulpotomy during the third test, which evaluated execution speed, compared to the player group, again without significance (P=.87). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not demonstrate significant differences between player and nonplayer dental students who participated in the study with regard to their fundamental technical abilities in a preclinical training environment. Nevertheless, it validated the feasibility of a methodology for a future longitudinal study to concentrate on the evolution of acquiring technical skills during preclinical training in these two populations. Consequently, further investigation is warranted to determine the potential impact of video games on the acquisition of surgical skills, including in dentistry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".