Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The evaluation of an evidence-based model of feedback implemented on an undergraduate dental clinical learning environment

Open access
Davis, Siobhan, Duane, Brett, Loxley, Andrew, Quigley, Duana·2022·BMC Medical Education

Abstract

Objectives: Dental graduates must graduate with high levels of clinical skills. Education in the clinical environment needs to be more than didactic supervision of practice by clinical teachers. Appropriate feedback in this context, is therefore critical to the development of student competence and confidence. This study was conducted to enhance and develop the assessment and feedback processes during clinical sessions in a Dental University Hospital in an effort to contribute to the development of students’ self-assessment skills, reflective ability and clinical competence. Methods: A new evidence-based model of feedback was introduced between clinical teachers and dental students. The implementation of this model was evaluated by students through a survey and focus groups. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied to the quantitative data, while thematic analysis applied to the qualitative data. Results: Findings from the survey indicated that students perceived the new model of feedback to be a positive addition to their learning experiences. The majority indicated a preference to continue using it. Quantitative analysis also demonstrated that students placed a high value on the feedback they received through the new model and associated it with improved individual performance. Five themes generated from the qualitative analysis echoed the perception that the model of feedback enhanced learning opportunities, especially when it was focused on individual performance and incorporated peer feedback. Students’ preferences in relation to feedback processes were also gleamed from quantitative and qualitative analyses, that is, provision of positive and constructive feedback, both in dialogue and in written formats, delivered during and after each clinical session and addressing their individual competency learning goals for the future. Some challenges to be addressed were also identified (e.g., time constraints, inter-personal issues, and non-conducive environments). Conclusions: Feedback is central to learning and remains a complex and challenging area. By adopting effective and evidence-based feedback practices through the introduction of a feedback model, students can be supported in regulating their own learning in the clinical learning environment.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12909-022-03630-1

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Cited by

See all 481

Metadata

Authors
Davis, S., Duane, B., Loxley, A., & Quigley, D.
Venue
BMC Medical Education
Published
2022-08-01
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
588-588
ISSN
1472-6920 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4289170329
Cited by
481
References
37
FWCI
94.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The evaluation of an evidence-based model of feedback implemented on an undergraduate dental clinical learning environment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12909-022-03630-1
The paper
Davis, S., Duane, B., Loxley, A., & Quigley, D. (2022). The evaluation of an evidence-based model of feedback implemented on an undergraduate dental clinical learning environment. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03630-1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.