Are the evaluation criteria used in preclinical endodontic training courses relevant? A preliminary study

Vantorre, Trystan; Bécavin, Thibault; Deveaux, Étienne; Marchandise, Pierre; Chai, Feng; Robberecht, Lieven

doi:10.1111/aej.12417

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study, all the steps of the endodontic treatment were evaluated, in accordance with Vantorre et al [25]. Root canal treatments are step-by-step interdependent, so it is reasonable to evaluate each step individually rather than to just evaluate the nal result.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rubric vs. numeric rating scale: agreement among evaluators on endodontic treatments performed by dental students

Escribano

Belliard

Baracco

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Students´ assessment should be carried out in an effective and objective manner, which reduces the possibility of different evaluators giving different scores, thus influencing the qualification obtained and the consistency of education. In the present study, we aimed to determine the agreement among four evaluators and compare the overall scores awarded when assessing portfolios of endodontic preclinical treatments performed by dental students by using an analytic rubric and a numeric rating scale. Methods A random sample of 42 portfolios performed by fourth-year dental students at preclinical endodontic practices were blindly assessed by four evaluators using two different evaluation methods: an analytic rubric specifically designed and a numeric rating scale. Six categories were analyzed: radiographic assessment, access preparation, shaping procedure, obturation, content of the portfolio, and presentation of the portfolio. The maximum global score was 10 points. The overall scores obtained with both methods from each evaluator were compared by Student's t. The influence of the difficulty of the endodontic treatment on the evaluators´ scores was analyzed by one-way ANOVA. Statistical tests were performed at a pre-set alpha of 0.05 using Stata 16. Results Difficulty of canal treatment did not influence the scores of evaluators, irrespective of the evaluation method used. When the analytic rubric was used, inter-evaluator agreement was substantial for radiographic assessment, access preparation, shaping procedure, obturation, and overall scores. Inter-evaluator agreement ranged from moderate to fair with the numeric rating scale, achieving higher overall scores. Presentation and content of the portfolio showed slight and fair agreement, respectively, among evaluators, regardless the evaluation method applied. Conclusions Assessment guided by an analytic rubric allowed evaluators to reach higher levels of agreement than those obtained when using a numeric rating scale. However, the rubric negatively affected overall scores.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rubric vs. numeric rating scale: agreement among evaluators on endodontic treatments performed by dental students

Escribano

Belliard

Baracco

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies considering taper had reported lower frequencies of adequate root canal treatment [9,10,30]. Taper is a subjective matter that cannot be adequately re ected in a two-dimensional radiograph, moreover, it may be in uenced by the canal's original anatomy giving the impression of a large taper irrespective of actual instrumentation [33]. Accordingly, it was excluded as an evaluation criterion in this study [25,32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychomotor Skills in Root Canal Treatment: Influence of Preclinical Training Time on Clinical Performance and Confidence Level of Undergraduate Dental Students

Barakat

Matoug‐Elwerfelli

Almohareb

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Performing root canal treatment is complex and requires the development of psychomotor skills adapted to working without the advantage of vision. Students have allocated special importance to preclinical training in helping them acquire these skills. The aim of this prospective study was to investigate the influence of exposure to additional preclinical training on undergraduate students’ confidence level and clinical performance defined by technical quality and quantity of root canal treatment. Methods: Clinical root canal treatment performed by a cohort of fifth-year undergraduate dental students was followed after half of them attended an additional (elective) endodontic preclinical course the year before. Root canal treatment was radiographically evaluated according to root canal filling length, density and presence of procedural errors. Technical quality and quantity of root canal treatment performed by students who had attended the elective course (attendees) and non-attendees, were compared. All students were also invited to participate in a survey to rate their undergraduate endodontic training and confidence levels performing root canal treatment. Statistical analysis of data was performed using Person chi-square test, Fisher Freeman Halton exact test, and T-test. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: No significant difference between the two groups in overall root canal treatment quality (p=0.619) was found. Although elective attendees performed significantly less procedural errors (p=0.004), non-attendees completed more root canal treatments (p=0.012). Despite, no significant difference in the reported level of confidence between the attendees and the non-attendees, significantly more elective attendees rated their undergraduate endodontic training as adequate (p=0.002).Conclusion: While there was no significant difference in overall technical quality of root canal treatment, nor confidence levels, between both groups, undergraduate students who attended additional preclinical training performed significantly fewer procedural errors. Furthermore, students who attended additional preclinical training were more satisfied with their undergraduate endodontic education.

show abstract

“…In our study, all the steps of the endodontic treatment were evaluated, in accordance with Vantorre et al [ 25 ]. Root canal treatments are step-by-step interdependent, so it is reasonable to evaluate each step individually rather than to just evaluate the final result.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rubric vs. numeric rating scale: agreement among evaluators on endodontic treatments performed by dental students

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Students´ assessment should be carried out in an effective and objective manner, which reduces the possibility of different evaluators giving different scores, thus influencing the qualification obtained and the consistency of education. The aim of the present study was to determine the agreement among four evaluators and compare the overall scores awarded when assessing portfolios of endodontic preclinical treatments performed by dental students by using an analytic rubric and a numeric rating scale. Methods A random sample of 42 portfolios performed by fourth-year dental students at preclinical endodontic practices were blindly assessed by four evaluators using two different evaluation methods: an analytic rubric specifically designed and a numeric rating scale. Six categories were analyzed: radiographic assessment, access preparation, shaping procedure, obturation, content of the portfolio, and presentation of the portfolio. The maximum global score was 10 points. The overall scores obtained with both methods from each evaluator were compared by Student’s t, while agreement among evaluators was measured by Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). The influence of the difficulty of the endodontic treatment on the evaluators´ scores was analyzed by one-way ANOVA. Statistical tests were performed at a pre-set alpha of 0.05 using Stata 16. Results Difficulty of canal treatment did not influence the scores of evaluators, irrespective of the evaluation method used. When the analytic rubric was used, inter-evaluator agreement was substantial for radiographic assessment, access preparation, shaping procedure, obturation, and overall scores. Inter-evaluator agreement ranged from moderate to fair with the numeric rating scale. Mean higher overall scores were achieved when numeric rating scale was used. Presentation and content of the portfolio showed slight and fair agreement, respectively, among evaluators, regardless the evaluation method applied. Conclusions Assessment guided by an analytic rubric allowed evaluators to reach higher levels of agreement than those obtained when using a numeric rating scale. However, the rubric negatively affected overall scores.

show abstract

Are the evaluation criteria used in preclinical endodontic training courses relevant? A preliminary study

Cited by 6 publications

References 27 publications

Rubric vs. numeric rating scale: agreement among evaluators on endodontic treatments performed by dental students

Rubric vs. numeric rating scale: agreement among evaluators on endodontic treatments performed by dental students

Psychomotor Skills in Root Canal Treatment: Influence of Preclinical Training Time on Clinical Performance and Confidence Level of Undergraduate Dental Students

Rubric vs. numeric rating scale: agreement among evaluators on endodontic treatments performed by dental students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About