BMC Med Educ. 2024 Jul 15;24(1):761. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05695-6.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the impact of case-based learning (CBL) versus lecture-based learning (LBL) on dental students’ clinical decision-making regarding DF severity using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scoring.
METHODS: Eighty first-year graduate dental students were randomly assigned to either the CBL (n = 38) or LBL (n = 42) groups. Both groups received instruction on DF diagnosis, with CBL involving small group sessions analyzing real cases and LBL involving traditional lectures. Effectiveness was assessed by presenting 32 dental fluorosis cases with Thylstrup-Fejerskov Index (TSIF) scores ranging from 0 to 7 through slide presentations to both groups for VAS assessment. Five evaluators of each group randomly selected were asked to repeat the rating 2 weeks later. Statistical analysis included two-way ANOVA for group and gender differences, intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for reliability, and Spearman correlation coefficients for validity.
RESULTS: Variations in VAS scores were observed between CBL and LBL groups, with no significant gender impact. Excellent inter- and intra-evaluator agreement was found for VAS scoring in both groups, indicating its reliability. Validation against established indices (such as DI and TSIF) demonstrated strong correlations, with CBL students exhibiting higher correlations.
CONCLUSIONS: CBL enhances students’ clinical decision-making and proficiency in DF diagnosis, as evidenced by more consistent and accurate VAS scoring compared to LBL. These findings highlight the importance of innovative educational strategies in dental curricula, with implications for improving training quality and clinical outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at the Clinical Research Center, Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University (Registration code: HGGC-036).
PMID:39010047 | DOI:10.1186/s12909-024-05695-6