Do Pre‐Clinical Summative Assessments Predict a Student's Clinical Performance? A Retrospective Study

TL;DR

This study examines whether pre-clinical assessments in dental school accurately predict students' clinical performance, finding only weak correlations.

Contribution

The study provides empirical evidence on the limited predictive power of pre-clinical assessments for clinical performance in dental education.

Findings

Pre-clinical theory marks showed a weak but significant positive correlation with clinical performance across three disciplines.

Only Restorative Dentistry showed a significant correlation between simulation marks and clinical performance.

Pre-clinical assessments were not reliable predictors of clinical competence.

Abstract

Dental students are deemed fit to treat patients (clinical readiness) based on their performance in pre‐clinical summative assessments. This involves assessing knowledge (theory exams) and technical skills (simulation‐based activities). However, there is weak evidence to support whether these pre‐clinical assessments accurately predict clinical performance. The aim of this study was to determine if pre‐clinical summative assessments predicted the clinical performance of students in a graduate dental programme.

This retrospective longitudinal cohort study analysed the results of pre‐clinical (theory, simulation) and clinical summative assessments in Restorative Dentistry, Periodontics and Endodontics from six cohorts of second‐ and third‐year students (2013 to 2019) enrolled in The University of Sydney's Doctor of Dental Medicine program. The association between pre‐clinical (theory and simulation) marks with clinical marks were analysed by discipline using Pearson's correlation coefficient (r
2).

A weak but significant positive correlation was found between a student's pre‐clinical theory mark and their clinical performance in all three disciplines. The only significant positive correlation between pre‐clinical simulation marks and clinical performance was found in Restorative Dentistry.

While some positive correlations were found between pre‐clinical and clinical performance, overall, these results indicate that pre‐clinical ability was not a reliable predictor of a student's clinical competence.

Assessing clinical readiness is complex. Our results indicate this attribute may potentially be better assessed using a range of qualitative and quantitative metrics. Further research is required to better define and quantify clinical readiness.

Figures