The purpose of this study was to evaluate part of one dental school's predoctoral curriculum by investigating correlations between students' inal grades in two preclinical courses and their performance in the related clinical courses. The sample consisted of 301 students at Tufts University School of Dental Medicine who graduated in 2010 and 2011. All inal grades used as data were obtained from the Registrar's Ofice and evaluated anonymously. The average preclinical inal grades differed signiicantly for students in the 2010 (M=84.92, SD=3.35) and 2011 (M=79.67, SD=4.67) classes, as did their average clinical inal grades (2010: M=88.38, SD=2.13; 2011: M=87.45, SD=2.06). The data for each class were therefore examined separately. Results showed that the correlation between students' preclinical grades and clinical grades in operative dentistry and ixed prosthodontics was statistically signiicant (2010: r 2 =0.144, p<0.001; 2011: r 2 =0.261, p<0.001). This inding suggests there may be a positive relationship between preclinical and clinical performance of these students; however, the discrete factors contributing to that relationship were not investigated in this study and require further research.Ms.
The aim of this study was to determine if dental students would benefit from changing their initial responses to what they have deemed to be more suitable answers during high-stakes multiple-choice examinations. Students are often advised to stay with their first answers despite evidence from other fields suggesting this is not the best course for obtaining optimal final exam scores. Data were collected for 160 first-year DMD students in fall 2013 for three operative dentistry and four biochemistry exams at Tufts University School of Dental Medicine. As students take all of their exams through ExamSoft, a test-taking software application that tracks and records all changes students make during the exam period, the subjective nature of previous studies on answer changing was eliminated. The results showed that all students changed their answers on a minimum of nine questions over the seven exams, with an average of 26.55 (SD=8.8) questions changed per student. Answers changed from an incorrect to a correct response comprised nearly 65% of total answer changes, while changes from a correct to an incorrect answer encompassed slightly above 10% of answer changes. Nearly all students (99.4%) benefitted from answer-changing with a net gain of at least two correct questions, with only one student not increasing the final score. Overall, the students greatly benefitted from changing their answer choice, suggesting that dental students could be advised to change their answers from their first choice if they identify a better option when taking multiple-choice exams.
Learning indirect vision with a dental mirror is challenging and can be overwhelming for beginning dental students. The Jumpstart Mirror Trainer is a new device that allows students to become proficient with mirror use before the start of preclinic without requiring in‐class practice sessions. The aim of this study, conducted in 2017, was to compare the effectiveness of the Jumpstart Mirror Trainer with the Mirroprep for teaching indirect motor skills. Forty‐seven first‐year dental students were randomized into three groups to use the Jumpstart Mirror Trainer, Mirroprep, or a control device for 15 minutes a day for ten days. To assess indirect motor skills improvement, students performed a maxillary cavity preparation before and after using their devices. A survey was used to assess students' comfort level with mirror skills and perceived helpfulness of the exercises. Forty students completed the study. The Jumpstart Mirror Trainer activities improved the students' scores significantly more than the Mirroprep activities (p=0.04) and the control device (p=0.006). Students in the Jumpstart Mirror Trainer group rated their device as being significantly more helpful than the control group rated its device in preparing them for the evaluation (p=0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in perceived helpfulness between the Mirroprep group and the control group (p=0.75). These results suggest that the Jumpstart Mirror Trainer may be able to improve students' indirect motor skills without requiring in‐class practice sessions and to do so more effectively than other existing methods.
Purpose/Objectives. The aims of this study were to assess first-year dental students’ attitudes and perceptions of diaphragmatic breathing (DB) and compare students with and without performance anxiety in terms of their attitudes and perceptions of DB. Methods. A lecture discussing a DB technique was presented to 195 students in the Operative Dentistry course at Tufts University School of Dental Medicine. Post-lecture, a 10-question survey was distributed and addressed students’ attitudes and perceptions towards DB and its potential impact in dental school, personal lives, and future careers. Results. Of the 81 surveys completed, 44 students (54%) reported having heard of DB previously; 59 (73%) reported they experience performance anxiety. Seventy-two students (89%) reported thinking that practicing DB will benefit them as practicing dentists; 71 (88%) reported they would use it if stressed in everyday life. Seventy-six (94%) reported they would be interested in using the technique before a competency exam. Students reporting performance anxiety expressed significantly greater agreement that DB is a valuable coping tool ( P = .016) and willingness to participate in DB before an Operative Dentistry competency exam ( P = .018). Conclusions. Teaching diaphragmatic breathing to first-year dental students may provide them with a valuable coping tool to mitigate stress and anxiety.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.