View Item 

Show simple item record

The effectiveness of a 3D virtual tooth identification test as an assessment tool for a dental anatomy course
dc.contributor.authorSuh, Esther
dc.contributor.authorKarl, Elisabeta
dc.contributor.authorRamaswamy, Vidya
dc.contributor.authorKim-Berman, Hera
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-06T17:27:21Z
dc.date.available2023-06-06 13:27:19en
dc.date.available2022-05-06T17:27:21Z
dc.date.issued2022-05
dc.identifier.citationSuh, Esther; Karl, Elisabeta; Ramaswamy, Vidya; Kim-Berman, Hera (2022). "The effectiveness of a 3D virtual tooth identification test as an assessment tool for a dental anatomy course." European Journal of Dental Education (2): 232-238.
dc.identifier.issn1396-5883
dc.identifier.issn1600-0579
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/172289
dc.description.abstractIntroductionThere has been a recent demand in dental education for distance learning and the use of virtual assessment tools that can leverage technology to potentially replace physical testing facilities. However, virtual tools that evaluate student learning should be validated prior to adoption. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness, efficiency and user satisfaction of a 3D tooth identification test for a dental anatomy course that can be given remotely.Materials and MethodsFirst-year dental students (n = 41) enrolled in a dental anatomy course took both traditional in-person practical and virtual 3D tooth identification tests consisting of 25 test items. The test scores, average test durations, faculty time commitment and user perception were collected and analysed. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients (p < .05) were determined for the criterion measures including real tooth identification test scores, comprehensive written examination and overall grade for the course.ResultsThe average number of correct answers for the real and 3D virtual tooth identification examination was 21.3 ± 2.65 and 20.7 ± 2.56, respectively. The average test duration for the real and 3D virtual tooth identification test was 25:00 and 21:16 min, respectively. There was a positive correlation (p < .05) of the 3D virtual tooth identification test with the real tooth identification test (0.368), comprehensive written examination (0.334) and the overall course grade (0.646). The total faculty time commitment for the real and 3D virtual tooth identification test was 96 and 65 min, respectively. The students cited difficulty in manipulating the 3D models.ConclusionThis study presents evidence that the 3D virtual tooth identification test can be used to assess dental students’ understanding of dental anatomy effectively and efficiently.
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons Inc
dc.subject.otherdistance education
dc.subject.otherassessment
dc.subject.otherdental anatomy
dc.subject.othereducational technology
dc.subject.othervirtual dental library
dc.titleThe effectiveness of a 3D virtual tooth identification test as an assessment tool for a dental anatomy course
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistry
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/172289/1/eje12691_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/172289/2/eje12691.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/eje.12691
dc.identifier.sourceEuropean Journal of Dental Education
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJohn R. Canvas LMS course design. Birmingham, UK: Packt Publishing Ltd; 2014.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceObrez A, Briggs C, Buckman J, Goldstein L, Lamb C, Knight WG. Teaching clinically relevant dental anatomy in the dental curriculum: description and assessment of an innovative module. J Dent Educ. 2011; 75 ( 6 ): 797 - 804.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSegura C, Halabi D, Navarro N. Design and validation of basic dental psychomotor skills test for novice dental students. J Dent Educ. 2018; 82 ( 10 ): 1098 - 1104.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDe Azevedo R, Da Rosa WL, Da Silva AF, et al. Comparative effectiveness of dental anatomy carving pedagogy: a systematic review. J Dent Educ. 2015; 79 ( 8 ): 914 - 921.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchleyer TK, Thyvalikakath TP, Spalleck H, et al. From informational technology to informatics: the information revolution in dental education. J Dent Educ. 2012; 76 ( 1 ): 142 - 153.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKim-Berman H, Suh E. Virtual and augmented reality in dentistry. In: Bayirli B, Kim-Berman H, Puntillo A, eds. Embracing novel technologies in dentistry and orthodontics. Ann Arbor: Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry; 2020: 102 - 116.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSketchfab. Virtual Dental Library 3D. 2018. Accessed on: October 21, 2020. https://sketchfab.com/search?q=virtual+dental+library&sort_by=-pertinence&type=models.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSketchfab. About us. 2020. Accessed on: October 21, 2020. https://sketchfab.com/about.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVicent L, Villagrasa S, Fonseca D, Redondo E. Virtual learning scenarios for qualitative assessment in higher education 3D arts. J Univers Comput Sci. 2015; 21: 1086 - 1105.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKim-Berman H, Karl E, Sherbel J, Ramaswamy V. Validity and user experience of an augmented reality tooth identification test. J Dent Educ. 2019; 83 ( 11 ): 1345 - 1352.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLone M, Vagg T, Theocharopoulos A, et al. Development and assessment of a three-dimensional tooth morphology quiz for dental students. Anat Sci Educ. 2018; 12 ( 3 ): 284 - 299.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKauffman H. A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning. RLT. 2015; 23: 1 - 13.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevy Y. Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Comput Educ. 2007; 48 ( 2 ): 185 - 204.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJhangiani RS, Chiang IA, Price PC. Research Methods in Psychology, 2 nd edn. Victoria, BC: BCcampus; 2015.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYang CL, Neumann LM, Kramer GA. Assessing context effects on test validity of the National Board Dental Examination Part I. J Dent Educ. 2012; 76 ( 4 ): 395 - 406.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTufekci A, Ekinci H, Kose U. Development of an internet-based system for mobile environments and evaluation of its usability. Mevlana Int J Educ. 2013; 3 ( 4 ): 57 - 74.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBodmann SM, Robinson DH. Speed and performance differences among computer-based and paper-pencil tests. J Educ Comput Res. 2004; 31 ( 1 ): 51 - 60.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFreire LL, Arezes PM, Campos JC. A literature review about usability evaluation methods for e-learning platforms. Work. 2012; 41 ( SUPPL1 ): 1038 - 1044.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMikalsen M, Walderhaug S. An investigation of factors influencing healthcare workers’ use and acceptance of E-learning in post-school healthcare education. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009; 150 ( 7465 ): 893 - 897.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCheng YM. The Effects of Information Systems Quality on Nurses’ Acceptance of the Electronic Learning System. J Nurs Res. 2012; 20 ( 1 ): 19 - 31.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCallan R, Haywood V, Cooper J, et al. The validity of using e4d compare’s “% comparison” to assess crown preparations in preclinical dental education. J Dent Educ. 2015; 79 ( 12 ): 1445 - 1451.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZhang D, Adipat B. Challenges, methodologies, and issues in the usability testing of mobile applications. Int J Hum-Comput Interact. 2005; 18 ( 3 ): 293 - 308.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMasoodian M, Lane N. An empirical study of textual and graphical travel itinerary visualization using mobile phones. In: Biddle R, Thomas B (eds). AUIC ‘03. Proceedings of the Fourth Australasian User Interface Conference on User Interfaces; 2003 Feb 1; Adelaide, South Australia: Australian Computer Society Inc; 2003; 18: 11 - 18.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuang TK, Yang CH, Hsieh YH, et al. Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) applied in dentistry. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2018; 34 ( 4 ): 243 - 248.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSinclair PM, Kable A, Levett-Jones T, Booth D. The effectiveness of internet-based e-learning on clinician behaviour and patient outcomes: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016; 57: 70 - 81.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMattheos N, Stefanovic N, Apse P, et al. Potential of information technology in dental education. Eur J Dent Educ. 2008; 12 ( Suppl 1 ): 85 - 92.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGarrison DR, Vaughan ND. Blended Learning In Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2008.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAriana A, Morin A, Pakneshan S, et al. Integration of traditional and e-learning methods to improve learning outcomes for dental students in histopathology. J Dent Educ. 2016; 80 ( 9 ): 1140 - 1148.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSandhu P, De Wolf M. The impact of COVID-19 on the undergraduate medical curriculum. Med Educ Online. 2020; 25 ( 1 ): 1764740. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2020.1764740.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBirch E, De Wolf MA. A novel approach to medical school examinations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Med Educ Online. 2020; 25 ( 1 ): 1785680. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2020.1785680.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrassett C, Cosker T, Davies DC, et al. COVID-19 and anatomy: stimulus and initial response. J Anat. 2020; 1 - 11. https://doi.org/10.1111/joa.13274.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTraxler J. Distance learning—predictions and possibilities. Educ Sci. 2018; 8 ( 1 ): 35.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOrfanou K, Tselios N, Katsanos C. Perceived usability evaluation of learning management systems: empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. IRRODL. 2015; 16 ( 2 ): 227- 246.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWeidlich J, Bastiaens TJ. Technology matters-the impact of transactional distance on satisfaction in online distance learning. IRRODL. 2018; 19 ( 3 ): 222 - 242.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBritannica E. Article: distance learning. 2016. Accessed on: May 5, 2020. www.britannica.com/topic/distance-learning.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceArdito C, Costabile MF, De Marsico M, et al. An approach to usability evaluation of e-learning applications. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2006; 4: 270 - 283.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMadikizela-Madiya N, Le Roux CS. Space and academic identity construction in higher education: an open and distance learning perspective. High Educ Policy. 2017; 30: 185 - 201.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePeach HG Jr, Bieber JP. Faculty and online education as a mechanism of power. Distance Educ. 2015; 36 ( 1 ): 26 - 40.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChu A, Biancarelli D, Drainoni ML, et al. Usability of learning moment: features of an e-learning tool that maximize adoption by students. West J Emerg Med. 2020; 21 ( 1 ): 78 - 84.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaveira-Gomes T, Ferreira P, Taveira-Gomes I, Severo M, Ferreira MA. What are we looking for in computer-based learning interventions in medical education? A systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2016; 18 ( 8 ): e204.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
eje12691_am.pdf
Size:
385.3KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
eje12691.pdf
Size:
299.8KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe its collections in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in them. We encourage you to Contact Us anonymously if you encounter harmful or problematic language in catalog records or finding aids. More information about our policies and practices is available at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.