↓ Skip to main content

Anatomy meets dentistry! Linking anatomy and clinical practice in the preclinical dental curriculum

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Anatomy meets dentistry! Linking anatomy and clinical practice in the preclinical dental curriculum
Published in
BMC Medical Education, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0825-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole Rafai, Martin Lemos, Lieven Nils Kennes, Ayichah Hawari, Susanne Gerhardt-Szép, Irmgard Classen-Linke

Abstract

Establishing a strong link early on between preclinical coursework and the clinical context is necessary for students to be able to recognize the practical relevance of the curriculum during their preclinical anatomical courses and to transfer knowledge more easily. Our objective was to enhance the clinical relevance of a preclinical anatomy course for second-year medical students of dentistry by implementing an interdisciplinary skills training course on "Palpation of the Head and Neck Muscles" and to measure the learning outcomes. For the curricular development of the expanded course module, Kern's 6-step approach was applied including subjective evaluation. We used a peer-teaching format supported by an e-learning application. A randomized control study measured effects of the two components (skills training, e-module) on learning outcomes. Four learning methods were compared: (1) lecture, (2) lecture + e-module, (3) lecture + skills training, (4) lecture + skills training + e-module. An objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) was used to measure and compare learning outcomes. The two-way variance analysis demonstrated that participation in the skills training had a statistically significant effect on the OSCE results (p = 0.0007). Students who participated in the skills training did better (φ 107.4 ± 14.4 points) than students who only attended the lecture (φ 88.8 ± 26.2 points). Students who used the e-module but did not attend the skills training earned a slightly but not significantly higher average number of points (φ 91.8 ± 31.3 points) than those who only attended the lecture. The learning outcomes of the skills training were again significantly increased when the training was combined with the e-module (φ 121.8 ± 21.8 points), thus making it the ideal method for achieving the learning objectives defined in this study. The "Palpation of the Head and Neck Muscles" interdisciplinary skills training course linking basic anatomical knowledge and clinical skills led to clearly improved learning outcomes for both, anatomical knowledge and clinical skills. The additional use of an e-learning tool (e-module) improved the learning effect.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Master 13 12%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 30 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 34%
Psychology 12 11%
Computer Science 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 34 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2016.
All research outputs
#14,744,192
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,129
of 3,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,318
of 415,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#34
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 415,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.