Effectiveness of E‐Learning in Oral Radiology Education: A Systematic Review. Issue 9 (1st September 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Santos, Glaucia Nize M.; Leite, André F.; Figueiredo, Paulo T. de S.; Pimentel, Nara M.; Flores-Mir, Carlos; de Melo, Nilce S.; Guerra, Eliete N.S.; De Luca Canto, Graziela
• Is Part Of: Journal of dental education. Volume 80:Issue 9(2016)
• Page Start: 1126
• Page End: 1139
• Publication Date: 2016-09-01
• Subjects: dental education -- oral radiology -- computer‐assisted instruction -- systematic review; Dentistry -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; Dentistry -- Study and teaching; Education, Dental; Dentisterie -- Étude et enseignement -- Périodiques; Tandheelkunde; Onderwijs; Periodicals; Periodical; Electronic journals; 617.6007
• DOI: 10.1002/j.0022-0337.2016.80.9.tb06195.x
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0022-0337

Abstract

Abstract : E‐learning has been used recently in dental curricula to support traditional learning methods. However, the published literature concerning e‐learning in oral radiology has shown mixed conclusions. The aim of this systematic review was to provide a synthesis of the effectiveness of e‐learning in oral radiology education when compared with traditional classroom learning methods. A search of the literature was conducted on the LILACS, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Trials registries were also consulted for ongoing trials, and a partial grey literature search was conducted. Controlled trials about oral radiology education that compared any e‐learning method with a control group using any traditional classroom instruction method were included. E‐learning effectiveness was measured using three outcomes from Kirkpatrick's model of evaluation: attitudes about e‐learning, knowledge gain, and performance on clinical procedures. Data were analyzed descriptively. Qualitative appraisal was performed according to the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials and MINORS tool for non‐randomized trials. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was identified related to the selection procedures, blinding, lack of sample size calculation, and incomplete analyses. Ten studies reported that students had positive attitude when using e‐learning. Results from the knowledge gain outcome were mixed. Only two studies examined performance on clinical procedures, showing contrasting results. The evidence reviewed in this study suggests that e‐learning in oral radiology is at least as effective as traditional learning methods and that students have positive attitudes about e‐learning.