The researchers randomly assigned the 60 students to two groups of 30. Students in the flipped classroom group received instruction through videos, while those in the live demonstration group received in-person demonstrations. Both groups learned the same two orthodontic subjects. Wire-bending represented a practical psychomotor skill, while cephalometric analysis represented an analytical cognitive activity. Including both tasks meant that the trial evaluated the teaching formats across two distinct forms of learning demanded in undergraduate orthodontic education.

When the researchers compared learning performance, neither orthodontic wire-bending nor cephalometric analysis showed a statistically significant difference between the flipped classroom and live demonstration groups. The analysis used a Chi-square test, Mann–Whitney U test and Spearman rank correlation coefficient. The researchers also tested intra-examiner reliability using an intraclass correlation coefficient. The reported performance result therefore indicates that this trial did not detect a learning advantage for either teaching approach; it does not by itself demonstrate that the approaches are equivalent beyond the students and tasks studied.

Student satisfaction distinguished the two groups. Participants assigned to video-based flipped classroom instruction gave significantly higher satisfaction ratings than students taught through live demonstrations, with P = 0.005. The trial also found that general self-efficacy was positively associated with satisfaction in the flipped classroom group. In practical terms, students with higher scores on the General Self-Efficacy Scale tended to report greater satisfaction with that method. The reported association applies to the flipped classroom group and should not be interpreted as a causal effect of self-efficacy or as proof that the teaching format itself caused the satisfaction difference.

The study’s scope was a randomized comparison of two teaching methods among 60 fourth-year dental students, with 30 students in each group. Its direct findings concern learning performance, satisfaction and self-efficacy in relation to orthodontic wire-bending and cephalometric analysis. The evidence does not establish whether the same results would occur in other dental programs, with different student populations, for additional clinical skills or under other forms of assessment. It also does not demonstrate superior clinical performance, longer-term skill retention or improved patient care. The supported conclusion is correspondingly narrow: video-based flipped classroom teaching produced no detectable learning-performance difference from live demonstration in these two orthodontic activities, while students receiving the video-based format reported significantly higher satisfaction.

Subject of Research: Randomized comparison of flipped classroom and live-demonstration instruction for orthodontic wire-bending and cephalometric analysis in fourth-year dental students.

Article Title: Effectiveness of video-based flipped classroom versus live demonstrations for teaching orthodontic wire-bending and cephalometric analysis

Article References: Naseri, N., Baherimoghadam, T., Saeedzadeh, M., Yeganeh, N., & Moosavi, S. F. (2026). Effectiveness of video-based flipped classroom versus live demonstrations for teaching orthodontic wire-bending and cephalometric analysis. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10298-4

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12909-026-10298-4

Keywords: flipped classroom, orthodontic education, dental students, wire-bending, cephalometric analysis, randomized trial, student satisfaction, self-efficacy, video instruction, live demonstration, Effectiveness, video-based