No abstract

Background: Critical thinking (CT) and clinical reasoning (CR), along with adequate clinical knowledge, are crucial components of thinking in clinical practice. This study aimed to assess, compare and analyze the relationship between CT skills, CR skills, and cognitive abilities in undergraduate (UDS) and clinical dental students (CDS).Methods: This natural experimental study was conducted using the quantitative descriptive-analytic methods with a cross-sectional design. Thirty UDS and sixty-one CDS were selected purposively. Demographic and academic data were obtained through questionnaires. The Critical Thinking Tool (CriTT) was used to measure CT skills, and CR skills were measured by the Diagnostic Thinking Inventory (DTI). Knowledge acquisition was measured through the Cognitive Ability Test (CAT), which is a set of multiple-choice questions specifically developed and validated for this study. The statistical differences between them were analyzed by one-way ANOVA, and their relationship was tested by correlation matrix analyses.Results: There were no differences in CriTT measurements between groups. The overall DTI score and subscale 2 (Structure of memory) showed significant differences between groups, as did the overall CAT score and all clinical science subscales. Correlation matrix analyses revealed CR skills were related to CT skills, while the cognitive abilities or knowledge acquisition were related to CR skills.Conclusion: Results showed the CR skills and cognitive abilities of clinical dental students are superior to undergraduate dental students. Generally, the results indicated the more skilled students are in critical thinking, the better are their clinical reasoning skills. Better cognitive abilities tended to improve clinical reasoning skills.

Background Health professionals are known to use various combinations of knowledge and skills, such as critical thinking, clinical reasoning, clinical judgment, problem-solving, and decision-making, in conducting clinical practice. Clinical reasoning development is influenced by knowledge and experience, the more knowledge and experience, the more sophisticated clinical reasoning will be. However, clinical reasoning research in dentistry shows varying results . Aims This study aims to observe the clinical reasoning pattern of undergraduate dental students when solving oral health problems, and their accordance with their knowledge acquisition. Material and methods This qualitative study employed the think-aloud method and the result was assessed through verbal protocol analyses. Five respondents from final year dental undergraduate students were agreed to participate. A unique hypothetical clinical scenario was used as a trigger. The audio data were transcribed, interpreted, and categorized as a clinical reasoning pattern; and the concept maps created were assessed by a Structure of Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy as knowledge acquisition. Results Observations on clinical reasoning patterns and the level of knowledge acquisition in five undergraduate dental students showed varying results. They applied clinical reasoning patterns according to their knowledge acquisition during didactical phase. Learners with inadequate knowledge relied on guessing, meanwhile learners with adequate knowledge applied more sophisticated reasoning pattern when solving problems. Conclusions Various problem-solving strategies were encountered in this study, which corresponded to the level of knowledge acquisition. Dental institutions must set minimum standards regarding the acquisition of conceptual knowledge accompanied by improvement of clinical reasoning skills, as well as refinement of knowledge and procedural skills.

Objective Approximately 70% of the elderly population living in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, has a low oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). This study aimed to identify the risk factors for low OHRQoL in the elderly population of Yogyakarta. Materials and Methods Oral Hygiene Index Simplified (OHI-S), Community Periodontal Index, Decayed, Missing, and Filled Teeth (DMFT) Index, and the number of natural occluding pairs (NOP) were assessed for 153 participants aged ≥ 60 years. Xerostomia, hyposalivation, and OHRQoL were also examined using Xerostomia Inventory (XI), unstimulated spitting whole saliva collecting method, and Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) questionnaire, respectively. OHRQoL was categorized as low, moderate, and high. Statistical Analysis Bivariate and multivariate tests were conducted to identify the risk factors for low OHRQoL. Results Initial analysis of characteristics of participants revealed that hyposalivation, xerostomia, periodontal pocket, high DMFT, NOP ≤ 5, poor OHI-S, and low OHRQoL were experienced by 40 (26.1%), 92 (60.1%), 39 (25.5%), 110 (71.9%), 112 (73.2%), 44 (28.8%), and 108 (70.6%) participants, respectively. Relative risk (RR) and p values for hyposalivation, xerostomia, periodontal pocket, high DMFT, NOP ≤5, and poor OHI-S were found to be at 1.573 (CI 0.681–3.637) and 0.225; 2.532 (CI 1.255–5.108) and 0.006; 0.846 (CI 0.391–1.830) and 0.606; 1.759 (CI 0.843–3.670) and 0.110; 1.133 (CI 0.522–2.461) and 0.008; and 2.723 (CI 1.293–5.734) and 0.632, respectively. Multivariate tests showed that xerostomia and NOP ≤5 had RR of 2.519 (CI 1.221–5.195) and 2.536 (CI 1.175–5.477), respectively. Conclusions Overall, elders with xerostomia or NOP ≤ 5 had 2.5 times higher risk of having a low OHRQoL.

Background: Health professionals in carrying out clinical practice are known to use various combinations of knowledge and skills, such as critical thinking, clinical reasoning, clinical judgment, problem-solving, and decision-making. Most of these skills are acquired during undergraduate education, clinical training and honed through professional practice. Aims: This study aims to observe the clinical reasoning patterns of undergraduate dental students when solving oral health problems from hypothetical cases. Furthermore, assessing their structure of knowledge through a concept map defined by a SOLO taxonomy. Material and method: This qualitative study employed the think-aloud method and the result was assessed through verbal protocol analyses. Five respondents from the final year dental undergraduate student were agreed to participate. A unique hypothetical clinical scenario was used as a trigger. The audio data were transcribed, interpreted, and categorized as a clinical reasoning pattern; and the concept maps created were assessed by SOLO Taxonomy as knowledge structures. Result: A hypothetico-deductive, an elaborated hypothetico-deductive, and an inductive or deductive reasoning model were found to be applied by the participants when solving problems. The reasoning used reflects the knowledge possessed. The variability of the structure of knowledge assessed by the concept map reflected the acquired knowledge during the pedagogical stage, which in turn have an effect on clinical reasoning patterns.Conclusion: It concluded that undergraduate dental student applies clinical reasoning patterns according to their level of knowledge structure. It is suggested to improve dental education, whether curriculum, teaching and learning methods, instructional methods, or dental environment, which emphasize critical thinking and clinical reasoning in order to provide optimal dental health services.