Educational technologies such as video cases can improve health professions student learning outcomes, but few studies in dentistry have evaluated video-based technologies. The goal of this study was to compare outcomes associated with video and paper cases used in an introductory public health dentistry course. This was a retrospective cohort study with a historical control group. Based on dual coding theory, the authors tested the hypotheses that dental students who received a video case (n=37) would report better affective, cognitive, and overall learning outcomes than students who received a paper case (n=75). One-way ANOVA was used to test the hypotheses across ten cognitive, two affective, and one general assessment measures (α=0.05). Students in the video group reported a significantly higher overall mean effectiveness score than students in the paper group (4.2 and 3.3, respectively; p<0.001). Video cases were also associated with significantly higher mean scores across the remaining twelve measures and were effective in helping students achieve cognitive (e.g., facilitating good discussions, identifying public health problems, realizing how health disparities might impact their future role as dentists) and affective (e.g., empathizing with vulnerable individuals, appreciating how health disparities impact real people) goals. Compared to paper cases, video cases significantly improved cognitive, affective, and overall learning outcomes for dental students.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 January 2014.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Dental Education
#908
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,207
of 319,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Dental Education
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 319,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
