Literature DB >> 23382526

E4D compare software: an alternative to faculty grading in dental education.

Walter G Renne1, S Theodore McGill, Anthony S Mennito, Bethany J Wolf, Nicole M Marlow, Stephanie Shaftman, J Robert Holmes.   

Abstract

The traditional method of evaluating student tooth preparations in preclinical courses has relied on the judgment of experienced clinicians primarily utilizing visual inspection. At times, certain aids such as reduction matrices or reduction instruments of known dimension are used to assist the evaluator in determining the grade. Despite the skill and experience of the evaluator, there is still a significant element of uncertainty and inconsistency in these methods. Students may perceive this inconsistency as a form of subjective, arbitrary, and empirical evaluation, which often results in students' focusing more on the grade than the actual learning or developing skills necessary to accomplish the preparation properly. Perceptions of favoritism, discrimination, and unfairness (whether verbalized or not) may interfere with the learning process. This study reports the use of a new experimental scanning and evaluation software program (E4D Compare) that can consistently and reliably scan a student's tooth preparation and compare it to a known (faculty-determined) standardized preparation. An actual numerical evaluation is generated by the E4D Compare software, thereby making subjective judgments by the faculty unnecessary. In this study, the computer-generated result was found to be more precise than the hand-graded method.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23382526      PMCID: PMC4201233     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dent Educ        ISSN: 0022-0337            Impact factor:   2.264


  10 in total

1.  Dental students' ability to evaluate themselves in fixed prosthodontics.

Authors:  George C Cho; Winston W L Chee; Derek T Tan
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.264

2.  Objective evaluation of quality in cavity preparations.

Authors:  A J Schiff; G Salvendy; C M Root; G W Ferguson; P R Cunningham
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  1975-02       Impact factor: 2.264

3.  Rater reliability: short- and long-term effects of calibration training.

Authors:  Reem Haj-Ali; Philip Feil
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.264

4.  Intra- and inter-examiner variability in evaluating preclinical pediatric dentistry operative procedures.

Authors:  Aly A Sharaf; Amr M AbdelAziz; Omar A S El Meligy
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 2.264

5.  Toward faculty calibration.

Authors:  G W Knight
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 2.264

6.  The effects of training and criterion models on interjudge reliability.

Authors:  J L Fuller
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  1972-04       Impact factor: 2.264

7.  Pilot study on criteria in cavity preparation--facts or artifacts?

Authors:  G Salvendy; W M Hinton; G W Ferguson; P R Cunningham
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  1973-11       Impact factor: 2.264

8.  Reliability of practical tests in operative dentistry.

Authors:  J D Lilley; H J ten Bruggen Cate; P J Holloway; J K Holt; K B Start
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  1968-09-03       Impact factor: 1.626

9.  Validation of a motor skills performance theory with applications for dental education.

Authors:  P H Feil; J J Gatti
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 2.264

10.  Analysis of disagreement in the evaluation of clinical products.

Authors:  R S Mackenzie; D E Antonson; P L Weldy; B B Welsch; W J Simpson
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  1982-05       Impact factor: 2.264

  10 in total
  9 in total

1.  Utilizing self-assessment software to evaluate student wax-ups in dental morphology.

Authors:  Karen R McPherson; Anthony S Mennito; Jompobe Vuthiganon; Yianne G Kritzas; Richard A McKinney; Bethany J Wolf; Walter G Renne
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.264

2.  Questions about the numerical value and quantitative data transfer of tooth preparation-from experience guidance to digital guidance.

Authors:  Hai-Yang Yu
Journal:  Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2021-02-01

Review 3.  Rethinking Assessment Concepts in Dental Education.

Authors:  Mohamed El-Kishawi; Khaled Khalaf; Dana Al-Najjar; Zahra Seraj; Sausan Al Kawas
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2020-10-14

4.  Development of an assessment strategy in preclinical fixed prosthodontics course using virtual assessment software-Part 2.

Authors:  Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh; Amin Nasehi; Elaine Davis; Anastasia Katsavochristou
Journal:  Clin Exp Dent Res       Date:  2018-05-31

5.  Development of an assessment strategy in preclinical fixed prosthodontics course using virtual assessment software-Part 1.

Authors:  Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh; Dillon Feigenbaum
Journal:  Clin Exp Dent Res       Date:  2018-05-31

6.  Automatic Evaluation of Crown Preparation Using Image Processing Techniques: A Substitute to Faculty Scoring in Dental Education.

Authors:  Bahareh Tahani; Abdolreza Rashno; Hamed Haghighi; Rasoul Monirifard; Hooman Nosrati Khomami; Rahele Kafieh
Journal:  J Med Signals Sens       Date:  2020-11-11

7.  Rating criteria to evaluate student performance in digital wax-up training using multi-purpose software.

Authors:  Takuya Mino; Yoko Kurosaki; Kana Tokumoto; Takaharu Higuchi; Shinichi Nakanoda; Ken Numoto; Ikue Tosa; Aya Kimura-Ono; Kenji Maekawa; Tae Hyung Kim; Takuo Kuboki
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 1.989

8.  Comparing feedback from faculty interactions and virtual assessment software in the development of psychomotor skills in preclinical fixed prosthodontics.

Authors:  Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh; Elizabeth H D'Angelo; Joseph Gambacorta
Journal:  Clin Exp Dent Res       Date:  2018-09-14

9.  Comparison of Digital Self-Assessment Systems and Faculty Feedback for Tooth Preparation in a Preclinical Simulation.

Authors:  Milan Stoilov; Lea Trebess; Markus Klemmer; Helmut Stark; Norbert Enkling; Dominik Kraus
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-12-15       Impact factor: 3.390

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.