{rfName}
Ed

Indexed in

License and use

Icono OpenAccess

Citations

6

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Feijoo-Garcia, GonzaloAuthor

Share

February 11, 2025
Publications
>
Article
Sí

Edpuzzle versus Moodle: Learning Tools in Pediatric Dentistry Practice: A Study Pilot

Publicated to:Healthcare (Basel). 10 (12): 2548- - 2022-12-01 10(12), DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10122548

Authors: Gallardo-Lopez, Nuria Esther; Sanchez-Sanchez, M Esperanza; Feijoo-Garcia, Gonzalo; Caleya, Antonia M

Affiliations

Univ Complutense Madrid, Fac Dent, Dept Dent Clin Specialties, Madrid 28040, Spain - Author

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to compare the results of two educational platforms for the development of Flipped Learning (FL) in the preclinical practices of paediatric dentistry: Edpuzzle and Moodle 3.4. Methods: Fifty students filled out a questionnaire on knowledge of pulp treatments in primary dentition (Pre-Q). They were divided into two groups: one watched a video on the pulpotomy technique before preclinical practice using Moodle 3.4 (group A) and the other used Edpuzzle (group B). On the day of practice, the students resolved any doubts with the teacher. Next, they performed a pulpotomy on an artificial tooth and answered the questionnaire again (Post-Q) together with a satisfaction survey. Results: In both groups, an increase in the number of correct answers was found in the Post-Q compared to the Pre-Q (p < 0.001), but with no significant differences between groups. The pulpotomy practice ratings were higher in group B, which used Edpuzzle (p < 0.001). In the satisfaction survey, we only found significant differences (p = 0.003) in access to the video, since 100% of the students in group A found it easy to view it through Moodle, unlike in group B. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the use of educational platforms specially designed for FL, such as Edpuzzle, can improve the qualifications of students in paediatric dentistry practices.

Keywords

EdpuzzleFlipped learningModeMoodlMoodlePediatric dentistryPerceptionsStudents

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from the Field Citation Ratio (FCR) of the Dimensions source, it yields a value of: 1.9, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: Dimensions Jul 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-07-05, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 2
  • Scopus: 2
  • Europe PMC: 1

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-07-05:

  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 21 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

    It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

    • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.