Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
ObjectivesConceptualizing the next patient interaction is logical, essential, and largely done intuitively with limited literature. The first objective is to elicit student thought experiences to four questions. The secondary objective is to classify responses for respective questions and to review faculty assessments.MethodsForty‐two students completed the exercise in the first clinical prosthodontics experience after a simulation course, in the fall of 2023. Four open‐ended questions were 1) differentiation from the ideal, 2) desired outcome(s), 3) self‐capabilities, and 4) consequences/prognosis. Nine different faculty assessed the exercise.Results100% of students responded to all four questions and 83% of responses were judged by faculty to grasp the concept in the question. The authors categorized responses into natural categories for each question. Authors separately assigned responses to categories. The agreement rate was 90%. Little to no overlap in responses was observed among the four questions. The sequence of questions led students to thought experiences from empathy in Question #1, to compassion in Question #2, and to self‐reflection in Question #3 to social projection in Question #4.ConclusionsThe main objective was met by engaging students in thought‐provoking responses to questions the experienced clinician asks of every patient encounter. The exercise elicited different kinds of thought experiences on four topics. The format was succinct with acceptance by students and faculty. The project has progressed from a concept some years ago to a recent pilot to full implementation with the current project. The next steps will be refinement and follow‐up in some years. The project follows an emulation model for critical thinking.
ObjectivesConceptualizing the next patient interaction is logical, essential, and largely done intuitively with limited literature. The first objective is to elicit student thought experiences to four questions. The secondary objective is to classify responses for respective questions and to review faculty assessments.MethodsForty‐two students completed the exercise in the first clinical prosthodontics experience after a simulation course, in the fall of 2023. Four open‐ended questions were 1) differentiation from the ideal, 2) desired outcome(s), 3) self‐capabilities, and 4) consequences/prognosis. Nine different faculty assessed the exercise.Results100% of students responded to all four questions and 83% of responses were judged by faculty to grasp the concept in the question. The authors categorized responses into natural categories for each question. Authors separately assigned responses to categories. The agreement rate was 90%. Little to no overlap in responses was observed among the four questions. The sequence of questions led students to thought experiences from empathy in Question #1, to compassion in Question #2, and to self‐reflection in Question #3 to social projection in Question #4.ConclusionsThe main objective was met by engaging students in thought‐provoking responses to questions the experienced clinician asks of every patient encounter. The exercise elicited different kinds of thought experiences on four topics. The format was succinct with acceptance by students and faculty. The project has progressed from a concept some years ago to a recent pilot to full implementation with the current project. The next steps will be refinement and follow‐up in some years. The project follows an emulation model for critical thinking.
IntroductionLittle literature exists on graduates’ application to practice for explicit critical thinking skills learned in dental school.PurposesDiscern the (1) degree to which graduates apply explicit critical thinking skillsets in practice; (2) degree of adaptation of critical thinking skillsets to practice; (3) frequency of use for critical thinking skillsets in practice; and (4) perceptions to improve critical thinking learning guidance in dental school.MethodsFive critical thinking exercises/skillsets were selected that had been in place over 5 years with at least one paper: geriatrics, treatment planning, technology decision making, ethics, evidence‐based dentistry; each followed concepts from an emulation model in critical thinking. Electronic survey administered in 2023/2024 to alumni graduated in the last 5 years.ResultsOf 98 (from 320 distributed) returned, 56 completed the entire survey. Dental school experiences positively influenced use of critical thinking skills in practice. On a five‐point scale, mostly 4s and 5s were reported for “…benefit your thinking.” Fifty‐three percent reported “using ideas from the exercise and developed my own thought processes,” 35% reported “using the thought process largely as offered in the college” and 5% reported “do not use the exercise.” Sixty percent reported using the skillsets hourly or daily. With minor variations all skillsets were reported positively for use in practice.ConclusionsA positive influence of critical thinking skills was gained from the college experience with explicit positive impact for each of the five critical thinking experiences. The questions may be a model for future follow‐up studies of explicit dental school critical thinking exercises.
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.