Prioritize research on treatment numbers, supervisor type and ratio, magnification access, and innovative teaching methods in undergraduate endodontic education¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 6 claims (6 for) · 1 study (1 quant-synthesis), q3 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 6 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The review sets out unanswered educational questions for future work: whether "innovative approaches such as 3D printed models, mobile apps or teaching methodologies improve clinical outcomes"; how many treatments students perform before graduation and whether this suffices for competence and self‐efficacy; the impact of supervisor type and the ideal supervisor‐to‐student ratio; and what infrastructure, including magnification, students use. It treats these as the levers for shaping endodontic education.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Studies must report metrics such as supervisor‐to‐student ratio and treatment numbers, which the review notes are seldom reported in education‐focused dental studies.

Constraints¶

• No insight from the extracted studies exists on the specific impact of modern dental technology such as loupes or dental operating microscopes on student outcomes.

Target Learners¶

• undergraduate dental students

Target Learning Goals¶

• clinical competence in nonsurgical root canal treatment
• self‐efficacy in endodontic procedures

Claims¶

• Students report more confidence and less anxiety when supervised by clinicians experienced in endodontics (review‐attributed) [+W]
• Student clinic success rates do not differ significantly from those reported for experienced clinicians and residents [+W]
• Pooled risk difference across 11 student‐clinic studies is 0.43 but with considerable heterogeneity (I² = 93%) [+W]
• Student root canal treatment success is lower in teeth with preoperative periapical radiolucencies (56.3%) than without (86.8%) [+W]
• Anterior and pre‐molar teeth show higher student treatment success rates (82.2% and 79.4%) than molars (68.7%) [+W]
• Root canal treatment by undergraduate students succeeds more often in teeth with vital pulps (87.8%) than necrotic pulps (65.6%) [+W]

Related Strategies¶

• Future research should use standardized validated outcome measures, longitudinal follow-up designs, and methods linking learner gains to patient-relevant outcomes

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Chien, P.Y.‐H., Hosseinpour, S., Peters, O.A. & Peters, C.I. (2025). Outcomes of root canal treatment performed by undergraduate students: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. International Endodontic Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.14246