Phone-based Audience Response System as an Adjunct in Orthodontic Teaching of Undergraduate Dental Students
NCT ID: NCT04336813
Last Updated: 2020-12-29
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
34 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-12-06
2018-05-29
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Statistical Analysis : The normal distribution will be tested. The Mann-Whitney U test will used to compare the median score for each answer that would be given by students in the questionnaires. Scores will be analyzed and compared to assess knowledge retention using cross-over analysis with Mann-Whitney U test
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The trial was designed as a cross-over clustered randomized control trial (each group was a cluster), so that each group acted as their own control for their knowledge's retention and perception.
Setting and consent: College of Dentistry, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University/Alkharj/ Saudi Arabia. Written consents were obtained from students before commencing the trail.
Participants : The cohort of the trial included the whole fourth-year undergraduate class (34 undergraduate dental students) in order to eliminate selection bias. Participants in this study had no prior orthodontic teaching, hence, no bias associated with increased knowledge in any orthodontic field was anticipated.
Randomization: Students were allocated to one of two even groups (G1 or G2) using computer generated randomization. each group (G1 and G2) consisted of 17 male students with a mean age of (23.27 years ± 0.86).
Intervention :
Lectures : Simultaneously, G1 and G2 attended two lectures (L1\&L2): L1 was titled "Management of Class III malocclusion", L2 was titled "Management of open bite and cross-bite". Both lectures were presented at the main campus of Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz College of Dentistry and they were conducted in an identical manner in all aspects including:
* Presentation in PowerPoint (Microsoft Corp, Redmond, WA)
* Both lectures were delivered by the same registered specialist orthodontist (FA),
* Learning outcomes of the delivered lectures (T1 and T2) were based on teaching outcomes specified by the National Commission for Academic Accreditation and Assessment in Saudi Arabia, and
* Both lectures delivered over the same period of time. Prior to lectures, students were instructed to register with the audience response system (ARS) and download its application (Poll Everywhere, San Francisco, California, USA, https://www.polleverywhere.com). Additional smart phones were available to students who do not have smart phones at the time of the lecture. Students were unaware of their allocation until the beginning of the first lecture.
In the lecture hall, G1 was separated from G2, and both groups completed an assessment of written multiple-choice questions (MCQs) scored out of 20, before the lecture. During L1, phone based (ARS) questions (PB-ARS) secretly displayed on the smart phones of the students in G1, and they were allowed to read the question and answer it, while those in parallel arm of the trial (G2) were blinded to those questions and answers. At the end of L1, both groups completed the same written MCQs assessment . A similar protocol was undertaken during L2 a week later, except that the groups were crossed-over, hence, the group which has had ARS integrated lecture in the previous week, has received in a non-ARS integrated lecture, and vice versa.
Formative exam:
MCQs formative tests consisted of 20 questions related to the taught topics during L1 and L2 was undertaken. In order to reduce the carry over effect, the PB-ARS questions during the lectures were not similar to the MCQs sheet. The used MCQs were piloted between authors to ensure its content validity and reliability. Contents validity was tested using test matrix and expert judgment. The test reliability was estimated using inter-rater reliability, a correlation of more than 0.7 was considered acceptable.
Summative exam:
Both groups attended their final written summative exams. L1 was undertaken 11 weeks prior to final exam while L2 was undertaken 10 weeks before the exam. The final exam was in MCQs format and included questions from all subjects taught in the second semester of the year including five questions relevant to the subjects taught in L1 and L2. The exam questions were identical for all students and were delivered at the same time under controlled conditions. Students who failed to attend the final summative exam were excluded to reduce the effect of time factor as confounding factors. The final exam scores of all student to questions related to TL1 and TL2 were anonymously collated using an excel sheet by independent tutor to reduce reporting bias. The maximum achievable score for the five questions relevant to the subjects taught in L1 and L2 was 5.
Students' perception:
At the end of L1, both groups were asked to fill a questionnaire regarding their experience with the lecture and intervention group participants were asked specific questions about their experience with PA-ARS . The used questionnaire was modified version from a previously used questionnaire to assess students experience with ARS in a recent trial . Students' responses were saved in an excel sheet after each lecture (L1, L2).
Analysis of the results:
Students' scores were saved in an excel sheet after each test. A specialized statistical analysis software was used (IBM SPSS statistics 22, version 22) The statistician was blinded to the allocation group. Scores were analyzed and compared to assess knowledge retention using cross-over analysis with Mann-Whitney U test for pre and post lecture quiz and t-test for summative test.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
OTHER
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group A
Receive ARS in lecture 1 and act as controller in lecture 2
Audience Response system
In the lecture hall, G1 was separated from G2, and both groups completed an assessment of written multiple-choice questions (MCQs) scored out of 20, before the lecture. During L1, phone based (ARS) questions (PB-ARS) secretly displayed on the smart phones of the students in G1, and they were allowed to read the question and answer it, while those in parallel arm of the trial (G2) were blinded to those questions and answers. At the end of L1, both groups completed the same written MCQs assessment
Group b
Receive ARS in lecture 2 and act as controller in lecture 1
Audience Response system
In the lecture hall, G1 was separated from G2, and both groups completed an assessment of written multiple-choice questions (MCQs) scored out of 20, before the lecture. During L1, phone based (ARS) questions (PB-ARS) secretly displayed on the smart phones of the students in G1, and they were allowed to read the question and answer it, while those in parallel arm of the trial (G2) were blinded to those questions and answers. At the end of L1, both groups completed the same written MCQs assessment
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Audience Response system
In the lecture hall, G1 was separated from G2, and both groups completed an assessment of written multiple-choice questions (MCQs) scored out of 20, before the lecture. During L1, phone based (ARS) questions (PB-ARS) secretly displayed on the smart phones of the students in G1, and they were allowed to read the question and answer it, while those in parallel arm of the trial (G2) were blinded to those questions and answers. At the end of L1, both groups completed the same written MCQs assessment
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
MALE
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Fahad AlHarbi
Assistant Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Fahad Alharbi, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University
Mohamed Almuzian, DClin.Dent.Orth
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
University of Edinburgh
Lubna Almuzian, DClin.Dent.Peado
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Berkeley Clinic at Glasgow
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University
Al Kharjah, , Saudi Arabia
Prince Sattam University
Riyadh, , Saudi Arabia
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Dhaliwal HK, Allen M, Kang J, Bates C, Hodge T. The effect of using an audience response system on learning, motivation and information retention in the orthodontic teaching of undergraduate dental students: a cross-over trial. J Orthod. 2015 Jun;42(2):123-35. doi: 10.1179/1465313314Y.0000000129. Epub 2015 Apr 7.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
1439-03-001
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id