Scoping Review on Active Teaching and Learning Methodologies in Dentistry

TL;DR

This scoping review explores active teaching methods in dentistry education and their potential to improve student learning.

Contribution

The study identifies and evaluates active teaching methodologies commonly used in undergraduate dentistry education.

Findings

Problem-based learning was the most studied active methodology in dental education.

Flipped classroom and gamification were also identified as commonly used methods.

Most studies were non-randomized and did not show significant differences compared to traditional methods.

Abstract

The objective of this scoping review is to identify the most extensively researched active teaching and learning methodologies in undergraduate dentistry courses and to evaluate their potential benefits for enhancing student knowledge.

The comprehensive review followed the guidelines proposed by PRISMA‐ScR. A search strategy was conducted in six electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Visual Health Library (VHL), and Google Scholar) until December 2024. Two independent reviewers conducted the search, screening and data extraction. Eligible studies included clinical trials and observational studies, focusing on active methodologies in higher education, excluding review studies, case series and case reports. No restrictions were placed on the publication date or language. Risk of bias assessment used the ROBINS‐I tool for non‐randomised studies and RoB 2 for randomised studies, following PRISMA extension and AMSTAR 2 protocols.

The initial search yielded 10 999 studies. After reviewing the full texts, 36 studies were included out of the 48 initially identified. Most studies were non‐randomised. While they did not indicate significant differences between active and traditional learning, they highlighted the potential advantages of active methodologies. Problem‐based learning was the most investigated, followed by the flipped classroom and gamification.

These methodologies offer potential benefits for undergraduate dental education, but this scoping review does not definitively establish their superiority over traditional teaching methods. Consequently, further well‐designed studies are necessary to validate the actual benefits of these methods in the teaching and learning process for undergraduate dental students.

Figures