JDE
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Dent Educ. 72(1): 59-66 2008
© 2008 American Dental Education Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Camgoz, M.
Right arrow Articles by Kawamura, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Camgoz, M.
Right arrow Articles by Kawamura, M.

Educational Methodologies

Dental Students’ Ability to Assess Gingival Health Status with DAAGS Software

Melike Camgoz, Ph.D.; Cem A. Gurgan; Kyoko Kajiwara; Makoto Kawamura

Key words: gingival health status, Oral Rating Index (ORI), oral health education, computer-aided test tool (CATT), dental students

Submitted for publication 10/04/06; accepted 10/05/07

The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of dental students at different levels of education (Basic, Preclinic, and Clinic groups) to assess the level of gingival health status by using the Development of Ability to Assess Gingival Status (DAAGS) computer software program designed according to the Oral Rating Index (ORI) criteria. Two hundred and thirteen dental students at three levels of dental education voluntarily participated in three DAAGS tests in which they judged twenty-four photos. The three groups were first- and second-year dental students (Basic), third- and fourth-year dental students who had not yet participated in the clinical periodontology course (Preclinic), and fifth-year dental students who had completed the clinical periodontology course (Clinic). A gold standard of each photo was shown after completing Test 1, and then Test 2 was conducted immediately. Two weeks later, the third test was performed. Analyses of differences among the groups and between the tests for each groups were carried out by using Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon Sign Rank tests, respectively. Students were asked to evaluate the DAAGS by written survey. Most of the students had a positive opinion. There were significant differences among the groups for correct and irrelevant answers and overall ability (p<0.001). The Basic group showed a significant (p<0.01) improvement between Test 1 and Test 2. This improvement was greater than Preclinic students and almost equal to Clinic students. The findings from this study indicate that the DAAGS software can serve as a useful instructional tool for education.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Dental Education Association.