Debating: effective and satisfactory learning method in dentistry.

BACKGROUND: Education in the modern world of health needs diverse methods of learning and teaching. The traditional education model has limited capacity for developing abilities such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and reasoning skills. Therefore, improving the quality of teaching-learning processes requires implementing educational innovations in the classroom and evaluating them. This study aimed to determine the impact of the debate teaching method on improving the abilities of general dentistry doctoral students. METHODS: The research was a semi-experimental study with pre-tests and post-tests to measure the knowledge and abilities of students. The study included 60 dental students who completed the fall 2022 session of the Community Oral Health (COH) 2 practical course. This course, one of three practical components within the Community Oral Health curriculum, aligns with the educational framework of general dentistry. Challenging topics on which there is no consensus in dentistry were chosen for the debate. The descriptive statistics indicators include an independent t-test and variance analysis test with a significance level of 5%. Were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: The results of the study showed that the average total knowledge (P < 0.001), 'perception of critical thinking skills (P < 0.001), expression power (P < 0.001), reasoning skills (P = 0.003), interpretation and Information analysis power (P < 0.001), the ability to find and use scientific databases (P < 0.001) and the ability to analyze and evaluate evidence (P < 0.001) increased significantly after intervention in students. 95% of students agreed/strongly agreed that this method enhances their ability to answer people's questions. From an instructor's point of view, students had 93.1% of the ability to reason and analyze information after intervention and 88.5% of the ability to think critically. CONCLUSION: The results of the study showed that the use of debate in the classroom is an effective way to present content. The process of evaluating data-driven arguments promotes higher-level cognitive skills and teaches students about the knowledge base and the use of scientific databases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration date: 21/11/2022, Registration number: IRCT20141128020129N3.

Salivary and serum periostin in kidney transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: End-stage renal disease (ESRD) treatment includes dialysis and kidney transplantation. Transplant rejection is a major barrier to transplant success. One of the markers mentioned in previous studies on renal function in patients with renal failure for various reasons is periostin (POSTN). The expression of POSTN correlates with interstitial fibrosis and reduced renal function. One of the limitations in this regard is the effect of oral lesions on the POSTN level. This study was conducted aimed to measure the relationship between salivary and serum POSTN and renal function in patients with a history of a kidney transplant, taking into account all the conditions affecting POSTN. METHODS: In this study, serum and saliva samples were taken from 23 transplant patients with normal function (NF) and 29 transplant patients with graft failure (GF). At least one year had passed since the transplant. Before sampling, a complete oral examination was performed. Salivary and serum POSTN was examined by ELISA. The results were analyzed by SPSS software. RESULTS: The POSTN level in the serum of the NF group (191.00 ± 33.42) was higher than GF patients (178.71 ± 25.68), but the difference was not significant (P = 0.30). Salivary POSTN in NF patients (2.76 ± 0.35) was significantly higher than GF patients (2.44 ± 0.60) (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The superiority of saliva as a diagnostic fluid includes ease of collection and storage, and non-invasiveness, all of which can lead to the replacement of blood with this bio-fluid. The significant results of salivary POSTN may be due to the lack of serum disturbing factors. Saliva is an ultra-filtered fluid from serum and therefore there are fewer proteins and polysaccharides attached to biomarkers in saliva and the accuracy of measuring these biomarkers in the saliva is more valuable than serum.