Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Dental schools have a primary responsibility to devise a curriculum that enhances students\' confidence and knowledge in orthodontic case analysis. This study aims to compare the confidence levels and performance of undergraduate students in orthodontic case screening, moderated by faculty in a lecture-based format against their self-analysis of the same cases 1 year later, using a case-based and flipped learning approach.
METHODS: This study involved 100 fifth-year students. The same group received predoctoral orthodontics training through an instructor-centered, didactic approach in their fifth year and a case-based, student-centered, flipped classroom approach in their sixth year. At the end of each semester, the students completed an orthodontic case analysis and a self-reflection survey.
RESULTS: This study found no significant differences in diagnostic capabilities for orthodontic findings between the two methods studied. However, the self-evaluation survey data revealed an increase in students\' confidence levels. This was specifically in terms of carrying out independent orthodontic case diagnosis, effectively communicating with orthodontic specialists, and their comfort in approaching orthodontic cases following the flipped classroom approach. Despite increased confidence in case diagnosis, the results showed that final-year students are uncertain about creating initial treatment plans and referring cases at an early stage.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite no observed improvement in students\' orthodontic diagnostic abilities after another semester of student-centered learning, their confidence in diagnosing orthodontic cases was notably enhanced.
METHODS: This study involved 100 fifth-year students. The same group received predoctoral orthodontics training through an instructor-centered, didactic approach in their fifth year and a case-based, student-centered, flipped classroom approach in their sixth year. At the end of each semester, the students completed an orthodontic case analysis and a self-reflection survey.
RESULTS: This study found no significant differences in diagnostic capabilities for orthodontic findings between the two methods studied. However, the self-evaluation survey data revealed an increase in students\' confidence levels. This was specifically in terms of carrying out independent orthodontic case diagnosis, effectively communicating with orthodontic specialists, and their comfort in approaching orthodontic cases following the flipped classroom approach. Despite increased confidence in case diagnosis, the results showed that final-year students are uncertain about creating initial treatment plans and referring cases at an early stage.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite no observed improvement in students\' orthodontic diagnostic abilities after another semester of student-centered learning, their confidence in diagnosing orthodontic cases was notably enhanced.
摘要：
背景：牙科学校的主要责任是设计课程，以增强学生对正畸病例分析的信心和知识。本研究旨在比较本科生在正畸病例筛查中的信心水平和表现,由教师以讲座为基础的形式主持，反对他们一年后对相同案例的自我分析，使用基于案例的翻转学习方法。
方法：这项研究涉及100名五年级学生。同一组通过以讲师为中心的方式接受了博士前正畸训练，第五年的说教方法和基于案例的方法，以学生为中心,在他们的第六年翻转课堂方法。在每个学期结束时,学生完成了正畸病例分析和自我反思调查。
结果：这项研究发现，两种研究方法对正畸发现的诊断能力没有显着差异。然而,自我评估调查数据显示，学生的信心水平有所提高。这特别是在进行独立的正畸病例诊断方面，与正畸专家有效沟通，以及他们在翻转教室方法后接近正畸病例时的舒适度。尽管对病例诊断的信心增加，结果显示，最后一年的学生不确定制定初步治疗计划和在早期转诊病例。
结论：尽管在另一学期以学生为中心的学习后，学生的正畸诊断能力没有改善，他们诊断正畸病例的信心明显增强。
方法：这项研究涉及100名五年级学生。同一组通过以讲师为中心的方式接受了博士前正畸训练，第五年的说教方法和基于案例的方法，以学生为中心,在他们的第六年翻转课堂方法。在每个学期结束时,学生完成了正畸病例分析和自我反思调查。
结果：这项研究发现，两种研究方法对正畸发现的诊断能力没有显着差异。然而,自我评估调查数据显示，学生的信心水平有所提高。这特别是在进行独立的正畸病例诊断方面，与正畸专家有效沟通，以及他们在翻转教室方法后接近正畸病例时的舒适度。尽管对病例诊断的信心增加，结果显示，最后一年的学生不确定制定初步治疗计划和在早期转诊病例。
结论：尽管在另一学期以学生为中心的学习后，学生的正畸诊断能力没有改善，他们诊断正畸病例的信心明显增强。
