• J Dent Educ · Jun 2015

    Comparative Study

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

    • Karen R McPherson, Anthony S Mennito, Jompobe Vuthiganon, Yianne G Kritzas, Richard A McKinney, Bethany J Wolf, and Walter G Renne.
    • Dr. McPherson is Assistant Professor, Department of Oral Rehabilitation, James B. Edwards College of Dental Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina; Dr. Mennito is Assistant Professor, James B. Edwards College of Dental Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina; Dr. Vuthiganon is Assistant Professor, James B. Edwards College of Dental Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina; Dr. Kritzas is an officer in the United States Naval Dental Corps; Dr. McKinney is an officer in the United States Naval Dental Corps; Dr. Wolf is Assistant Professor, James B. Edwards College of Dental Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina; and Dr. Renne is Associate Professor, James B. Edwards College of Dental Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina. drkaren71@aol.com.
    • J Dent Educ. 2015 Jun 1; 79 (6): 697-704.

    AbstractTraditionally, evaluating student work in preclinical courses has relied on the judgment of experienced clinicians utilizing visual inspection. However, research has shown significant disagreement between different evaluators (interrater reliability) and between results from the same evaluator at different times (intrarater reliability). This study evaluated a new experimental software (E4D Compare) to compare 66 student-produced tooth wax-ups at one U.S. dental school to an ideal standard after both had been digitally scanned. Using 3D surface-mapping technology, a numerical evaluation was generated by calculating the surface area of the student's work that was within a set range of the ideal. The aims of the study were to compare the reliability of faculty and software grades and to determine the ideal tolerance value for the software. The investigators hypothesized that the software would provide more consistent feedback than visual grading and that a tolerance value could be determined that closely correlated with the faculty grade. The results showed that a tolerance level of 450 μm provided 96% agreement of grades compared with only 53% agreement for faculty. The results suggest that this software could be used by faculty members as a mechanism to evaluate student work and for students to use as a self-assessment tool.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.