{"id":{"repo_id":"cork","oai_identifier":"oai:cora.ucc.ie:10468/14478"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cork/oai:cora.ucc.ie:10468/14478","repository":{"repo_id":"cork","name":"University College Cork","base_url":"https://cora.ucc.ie/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Proficiency-based progression (PBP) training- the future model for dental operative skills training? A systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature","abstract":"Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of proficiency-based progression (PBP) operative training using validated performance metrics, by comparing this to standard, conventional training methods. Data: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines for the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Study quality was assessed using the MERSQI tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were pooled using biased corrected standardized mean difference and ratio-of-means (ROM). Summary effects were evaluated using a series of fixed and random effects models. The primary outcome was the number of procedural errors performed comparing PBP and non-PBP-based training pathways. In quantitative synthesis testing for procedural errors, a pooled meta-analysis on 87 trainees was conducted using random-effects models. In a ROM analysis, PBP was estimated to reduce the mean rate of errors by 62%, when compared to standard training (ROM 0.38, 95% CI: 0.25; 0.58; p < 0.001) Sources: The electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE and Cochrane library’s CENTRAL were searched from inception to 8/11/2021. Filters activated were Randomized Controlled trials, clinical trial. Study selection: 13 studies were included for review with 11 included in the quantitative synthesis from 174 potentially relevant publications identified by the search strategy. Main inclusion criteria were studies comparing standard surgical/operative training with proficiency-based simulation training using validated metrics based on expert performance. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis found that PBP training improved trainees' performances, by decreasing procedural errors. There is sufficient evidence to explore PBP training for use in dental skills training.","abstract_html":"Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of proficiency-based progression (PBP) operative training using validated performance metrics, by comparing this to standard, conventional training methods. Data: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines for the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Study quality was assessed using the MERSQI tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were pooled using biased corrected standardized mean difference and ratio-of-means (ROM). Summary effects were evaluated using a series of fixed and random effects models. The primary outcome was the number of procedural errors performed comparing PBP and non-PBP-based training pathways. In quantitative synthesis testing for procedural errors, a pooled meta-analysis on 87 trainees was conducted using random-effects models. In a ROM analysis, PBP was estimated to reduce the mean rate of errors by 62%, when compared to standard training (ROM 0.38, 95% CI: 0.25; 0.58; p < 0.001) Sources: The electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE and Cochrane library’s CENTRAL were searched from inception to 8/11/2021. Filters activated were Randomized Controlled trials, clinical trial. Study selection: 13 studies were included for review with 11 included in the quantitative synthesis from 174 potentially relevant publications identified by the search strategy. Main inclusion criteria were studies comparing standard surgical/operative training with proficiency-based simulation training using validated metrics based on expert performance. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis found that PBP training improved trainees' performances, by decreasing procedural errors. There is sufficient evidence to explore PBP training for use in dental skills training.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Kehily, Elaine"],"institution":"University College Cork","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Roberts, Anthony","Allen, Finbarr","Gallagher, Anthony G."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2023,"date_issued":"2023-01","date_published":"2023-01","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:47:07Z","subjects":["Simulation training","Clinical skills training","Training and assessment","Proficiency-based training"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["© 2023, Elaine Kehily."],"rights_urls":["https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/10468/14478","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Roberts, Anthony","Allen, Finbarr","Gallagher, Anthony G."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Kehily, Elaine"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2023-05-17T14:33:44Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2023-05-17T14:33:44Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2023-01"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["University College Cork"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Masters thesis (Research)"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Masters"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["MRes - Master of Research"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Simulation training","Clinical skills training","Training and assessment","Proficiency-based training"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["© 2023, Elaine Kehily."]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/10468/14478"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of proficiency-based progression (PBP) operative training using validated performance metrics, by comparing this to standard, conventional training methods. Data: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines for the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Study quality was assessed using the MERSQI tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were pooled using biased corrected standardized mean difference and ratio-of-means (ROM). Summary effects were evaluated using a series of fixed and random effects models. The primary outcome was the number of procedural errors performed comparing PBP and non-PBP-based training pathways. In quantitative synthesis testing for procedural errors, a pooled meta-analysis on 87 trainees was conducted using random-effects models. In a ROM analysis, PBP was estimated to reduce the mean rate of errors by 62%, when compared to standard training (ROM 0.38, 95% CI: 0.25; 0.58; p < 0.001) Sources: The electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE and Cochrane library’s CENTRAL were searched from inception to 8/11/2021. Filters activated were Randomized Controlled trials, clinical trial. Study selection: 13 studies were included for review with 11 included in the quantitative synthesis from 174 potentially relevant publications identified by the search strategy. Main inclusion criteria were studies comparing standard surgical/operative training with proficiency-based simulation training using validated metrics based on expert performance. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis found that PBP training improved trainees' performances, by decreasing procedural errors. There is sufficient evidence to explore PBP training for use in dental skills training."]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Proficiency-based progression (PBP) training- the future model for dental operative skills training? A systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Roberts, Anthony","Allen, Finbarr","Gallagher, Anthony G."],"dc:creator":["Kehily, Elaine"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2023-05-17T14:33:44Z"],"dc:date.available":["2023-05-17T14:33:44Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2023-01"],"dc:description.abstract":["Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of proficiency-based progression (PBP) operative training using validated performance metrics, by comparing this to standard, conventional training methods. Data: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines for the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Study quality was assessed using the MERSQI tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were pooled using biased corrected standardized mean difference and ratio-of-means (ROM). Summary effects were evaluated using a series of fixed and random effects models. The primary outcome was the number of procedural errors performed comparing PBP and non-PBP-based training pathways. In quantitative synthesis testing for procedural errors, a pooled meta-analysis on 87 trainees was conducted using random-effects models. In a ROM analysis, PBP was estimated to reduce the mean rate of errors by 62%, when compared to standard training (ROM 0.38, 95% CI: 0.25; 0.58; p < 0.001) Sources: The electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE and Cochrane library’s CENTRAL were searched from inception to 8/11/2021. Filters activated were Randomized Controlled trials, clinical trial. Study selection: 13 studies were included for review with 11 included in the quantitative synthesis from 174 potentially relevant publications identified by the search strategy. Main inclusion criteria were studies comparing standard surgical/operative training with proficiency-based simulation training using validated metrics based on expert performance. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis found that PBP training improved trainees' performances, by decreasing procedural errors. There is sufficient evidence to explore PBP training for use in dental skills training."],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/10468/14478"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:publisher":["University College Cork"],"dc:rights":["© 2023, Elaine Kehily."],"dc:rights.uri":["https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/"],"dc:subject":["Simulation training","Clinical skills training","Training and assessment","Proficiency-based training"],"dc:title":["Proficiency-based progression (PBP) training- the future model for dental operative skills training? A systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature"],"dc:type":["Masters thesis (Research)"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Masters"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["MRes - Master of Research"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:47:07Z"}