Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study aims to compare the effects of artificial intelligence-generated feedback and human instructor feedback on learning outcomes in preclinical restorative dentistry education. Third-year dental students performing restorative procedures on simulated teeth received either AI-generated feedback or instructor feedback during training sessions. The effects of the feedback methods were evaluated using practical performance scores, state anxiety levels, and student perception measures. The study investigates whether AI-generated feedback can serve as an effective educational support tool in preclinical dental training.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI-Generated Feedback | Experimental | Participants received formative feedback generated by an artificial intelligence chatbot during preclinical restorative dentistry training. Feedback was provided according to predefined evaluation criteria and was intended to support students' practical skill development. |
|
| Human Instructor Feedback | Active Comparator | Participants received formative feedback from a faculty instructor during preclinical restorative dentistry training. Feedback was provided according to the same predefined evaluation criteria used in the AI-generated feedback group. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Intelligence-Generated Feedback | Behavioral | Participants received formative feedback generated by an artificial intelligence chatbot during preclinical restorative dentistry training. Feedback was based on predefined evaluation criteria and was provided to support practical skill development and learning. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Practical Performance Score | Students' practical performance was evaluated using a standardized rubric consisting of eight assessment criteria for preclinical restorative dentistry procedures. Total scores ranged from 0 to 16, with higher scores indicating better practical performance. | At completion of the preclinical training session (approximately 2 weeks after study initiation) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change in State Anxiety | State anxiety was assessed using the 5-item State Anxiety Inventory (STAIS-5), a shortened version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. The total score ranges from 5 to 20, with higher scores indicating greater state anxiety. A score of 10 or higher indicates clinically significant state anxiety. | Baseline (before the practical session) and immediately after completion of the practical session (approximately 2 hours). |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Third-year dental students enrolled in the preclinical restorative dentistry course at Cukurova University Faculty of Dentistry.
Attendance at the scheduled practical training session. Provision of written informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria:
Students who declined to participate. Students who did not complete the practical training session. Students with incomplete performance assessment or questionnaire data.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cukurova University Faculty of Dentistry | Adana | Turkey (Türkiye) |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Participants were assigned to one of two parallel groups receiving either artificial intelligence-generated feedback or human instructor feedback during preclinical restorative dentistry training. Educational outcomes, including practical performance, state anxiety, and student perceptions, were compared between groups.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Human Instructor Feedback | Behavioral | Participants received formative feedback from a faculty instructor during preclinical restorative dentistry training. Feedback was provided according to predefined evaluation criteria. |
|
| Student Perception of the Feedback Method | Student perception was assessed using an 8-item, 5-point Likert questionnaire. The reported outcome was the mean questionnaire score, ranging from 1.0 to 5.0, with higher scores indicating more positive perceptions of the feedback method. | Immediately after completion of the practical training session (approximately 2 hours after baseline). |