PDF(Pubmed)
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.
BACKGROUND: The study was registered at the Clinical Research Center, Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University (Registration code: HGGC-036).
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.
BACKGROUND: The study was registered at the Clinical Research Center, Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University (Registration code: HGGC-036).
摘要：
目的：本研究旨在使用视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分比较基于案例的学习（CBL）和基于讲座的学习（LBL）对牙科学生关于DF严重程度的临床决策的影响。
方法：将80名牙科一年级研究生随机分配到CBL（n=38）或LBL（n=42）组。两组均接受DF诊断指导，CBL涉及小组会议，分析真实案例，LBL涉及传统讲座。通过向两组进行VAS评估的幻灯片演示，对32例氟牙症患者的Thylstrup-Fejerskov指数（TSIF）评分从0到7进行评估，从而评估了有效性。随机选择的每组的五名评估者被要求在2周后重复评级。统计分析包括群体和性别差异的双向方差分析，可靠性的类内相关系数(ICC)，和斯皮尔曼相关系数的有效性。
结果：在CBL组和LBL组之间观察到VAS评分的差异，没有显著的性别影响。在两组的VAS评分中，评估者之间和评估者之间的一致性都很好，说明其可靠性。对已建立的指数(如DI和TSIF)的验证证明了很强的相关性，与CBL学生表现出更高的相关性。
结论：CBL提高了学生的临床决策能力和DF诊断能力，与LBL相比，VAS评分更加一致和准确。这些发现突出了创新教育策略在牙科课程中的重要性，对提高培训质量和临床结果具有重要意义。
背景：该研究在临床研究中心注册，口腔医院,武汉大学（注册码：HGGC-036）。
方法：将80名牙科一年级研究生随机分配到CBL（n=38）或LBL（n=42）组。两组均接受DF诊断指导，CBL涉及小组会议，分析真实案例，LBL涉及传统讲座。通过向两组进行VAS评估的幻灯片演示，对32例氟牙症患者的Thylstrup-Fejerskov指数（TSIF）评分从0到7进行评估，从而评估了有效性。随机选择的每组的五名评估者被要求在2周后重复评级。统计分析包括群体和性别差异的双向方差分析，可靠性的类内相关系数(ICC)，和斯皮尔曼相关系数的有效性。
结果：在CBL组和LBL组之间观察到VAS评分的差异，没有显著的性别影响。在两组的VAS评分中，评估者之间和评估者之间的一致性都很好，说明其可靠性。对已建立的指数(如DI和TSIF)的验证证明了很强的相关性，与CBL学生表现出更高的相关性。
结论：CBL提高了学生的临床决策能力和DF诊断能力，与LBL相比，VAS评分更加一致和准确。这些发现突出了创新教育策略在牙科课程中的重要性，对提高培训质量和临床结果具有重要意义。
背景：该研究在临床研究中心注册，口腔医院,武汉大学（注册码：HGGC-036）。
