ArticleBMC medical education2025
Accuracy of periodontal probing depths in the training of undergraduate dental students.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrecise periodontal diagnosis is taught and routinely performed during dental school training. The aims of this study were to determine to what extent the measurement values obtained by students during their clinical training years correspond to those of licensed dentists; to assess the distribution of divergent results relative to measurement positions; and to identify sources of error. The study also investigated whether fewer errors are made in accessible areas such as the anterior teeth and vestibular areas in comparison with inaccessible areas. Finally, it investigated the influence of students' level of experience on measurement accuracy. MATERIALS AND
methodsData for probing depths in 6858 measurements made by students in comparison with dentists were documented and analyzed statistically. The influence of periodontal pocket depths on measurement accuracy was examined, and it was investigated whether the location of pockets (vestibular/oral, anterior/posterior, quadrant, mesial/medial/distal) influenced measurement divergences.
resultsThere were significant differences (P < 0.001) between the students' and dentists' measurements, which were in agreement in 63% of cases. Differences of 1 mm were observed in 80% of cases, 2 mm in 15.3%, and 3, 4, or 5 mm in fewer than 5%. Measurement differences in the last clinical course were significantly the largest (P < 0.01). Accuracy in medial measurement points was significantly better (P < 0.001). Differences in measurement accuracy in the anterior and posterior teeth, as well as on the vestibular and oral surfaces, only became apparent after analysis of subgroups for healthy, mild, and severe cases. Patients with severe cases had significantly smaller measurement differences in both the oral and vestibular areas (P < 0.02). Healthy patients had significantly better measurement values in the posterior region (P = 0.02), and patients with mild conditions had significantly better values in the anterior region (P = 0.03).
conclusionsThe results of this retrospective examination show that students already achieve a comparatively high level of measurement accuracy, but that differences occur, particularly in the approximal region. Targeted practical training and structured feedback systems could help further improve diagnostic precision, which is particularly important when there is a recall system with changing practitioners.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.