Computer-assisted learning in orthodontic education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of computer-assisted learning (CAL) with traditional methods of learning in orthodontic education. Comprehensive electronic and manual searches of randomized controlled trials and prospective studies were conducted. Participants considered were undergraduate or postgraduate orthodontic students or orthodontic educators. The main outcome measure of CAL efficacy was knowledge gain. The time efficiency of the method was assessed based on the time spent learning the material, while its qualitative effect was tested by the attitudes of participants. Nine studies assessing CAL in teaching orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning met the inclusion criteria. A statistically significantly higher knowledge gain favoring CAL was identified in studies that used pre- and post-intervention tests (weighted mean difference [WMD] 9.78 percent, 95 percent confidence intervals [CI] 2.89 percent, 16.67 percent; test of heterogeneity p=0.25). For studies that used only post-intervention tests, significantly greater efficacy was noted, but the effect size was smaller (WMD 3.79 percent, 95 percent CI 0.31 percent, 7.28 percent; test of heterogeneity p=0.003). Overall, student attitudes were positive towards CAL. No conclusions can be drawn about the time efficiency of CAL. Further studies are warranted to examine other important outcomes, including CAL efficacy in teaching other orthodontic topics, cost-effectiveness, and knowledge retention.

[1]  Harold Rosenberg,et al.  The effectiveness of computer-aided learning in teaching orthodontics: a review of the literature. , 2005, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[2]  J. Elen,et al.  Students' views on the efficiency of instruction: An exploratory survey of the instructional metacognitive knowledge of university freshmen , 1998 .

[3]  R. Komolpis,et al.  Web-based orthodontic instruction and assessment. , 2002, Journal of dental education.

[4]  P. Wisth,et al.  Orthodontic concern among 11-year-old children and their parents compared with orthodontic treatment need assessed by index of orthodontic treatment need. , 1996, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[5]  J. Mayhall,et al.  Introducing dental students to evidence-based decisions in dental care. , 2008, Journal of dental education.

[6]  G Willems,et al.  Instructional multimedia programs for self-directed learning in undergraduate and postgraduate training in orthodontics. , 2003, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.

[7]  G Willems,et al.  Instructional multimedia program versus standard lecture: a comparison of two methods for teaching the undergraduate orthodontic curriculum. , 2004, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.

[8]  Chen-Lin C. Kulik,et al.  Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. , 1991 .

[9]  D. Kinane,et al.  Teaching periodontal pocket charting to dental students: a comparison of computer assisted learning and traditional tutorials , 2003, British Dental Journal.

[10]  M. Atkins,et al.  A study into the effectiveness of a text‐based computer‐assisted learning program in comparison with seminar teaching of orthodontics , 1998 .

[11]  P A Cohen,et al.  A meta-analysis of individualized instruction in dental education. , 1992, Journal of dental education.

[12]  James C. Lester,et al.  The Case for Social Agency in Computer-Based Teaching: Do Students Learn More Deeply When They Interact With Animated Pedagogical Agents? , 2001 .

[13]  D. Altman,et al.  Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  W P Rock,et al.  A Hypertext tutorial for teaching cephalometrics. , 1997, British journal of orthodontics.

[15]  J. Luffingham An Assessment of Computer-assisted learning in Orthodontics , 1984, British journal of orthodontics.

[16]  E. Palmer,et al.  Computer‐aided learning: an overvalued educational resource? , 1999, Medical education.

[17]  C D Stephens,et al.  The acceptability of computer-assisted orthodontic instruction to the undergraduate. A preliminary report , 1983, British Dental Journal.

[18]  E. Palmer,et al.  Computers in medical education 1: evaluation of a problem-orientated learning package. , 1998, The Australian and New Zealand journal of surgery.

[19]  D. Bearn,et al.  Computer-aided Learning (CAL): An Effective Way to Teach the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN)? , 2001, Journal of orthodontics.

[20]  William R Proffit,et al.  Use of recorded interactive seminars in orthodontic distance education. , 2007, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[21]  N. Irvine,et al.  Computer-assisted instruction in mixed dentition analysis. , 1986, Journal of dental education.

[22]  Howard C. Tenenbaum,et al.  Evaluation of computer-aided learning in orthodontics. , 2010, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[23]  S Weerakone,et al.  An Evaluation of a Hypertext System for Computer-assisted Learning in Orthodontics , 1993, British journal of orthodontics.

[24]  N Mattheos,et al.  Computer assisted learning. A review. , 2001, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.