Scholarlink

Aim <p>The study aimed to evaluate gaze behavior during tooth preparation assessments by analyzing and comparing eye-tracking metrics between novice and expert groups.</p> Methods <p>Thirty-five participants, divided into novices (<i>n</i> = 18, mean age = 22.9 ± 1.5 years) and experts (<i>n</i> = 17, mean age = 44.3 ± 13.1 years), were recruited for this observational study. The novice group consisted of third-year dental students, while the expert group comprised licensed dentists with an average of 18.9 ± 12.7 years of clinical experience. Eye-tracking metrics, including total duration of fixation (TDF), number of fixations (NF), time to first fixation (TFF), and pupil size, were measured across different areas of interest (AOIs). The data was analyzed with a two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) model.</p> Results <p>Both novices and experts focused mainly on the “buccal wall” and “margin” (finishing line) AOIs during tooth preparation evaluation. The novices showed significantly longer TDF (<i>P</i> = 0.034), more NF (<i>P</i> = 0.047), and longer TFF (<i>P</i> = 0.021) compared to experts. However, there were no significant differences in pupil diameter between groups or AOIs, indicating similar cognitive load despite differences in visual behavior.</p> Conclusion <p>Overall, the novices tend to have longer fixation durations, more frequent fixations, and a delayed time to first fixation compared to experts during tooth preparation assessments. The study also concludes that both novices and experts primarily focus on the buccal wall and finishing line. These differences indicate that visual processing varies between the two groups, with novices demonstrating less efficient visual processing skills. In general, the findings highlight how experience influences gaze behavior in the assessment of tooth preparation.</p> Clinical significance <p>These findings can refine pre-clinical prosthodontic education by fostering expert-like visual processing skills, enabling students to better understand and perform prosthodontic tasks. This targeted approach enhances their training and prepares them more effectively for clinical practice.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Eye-tracking metrics to compare visual attention in prosthodontic preclinical evaluations

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月21日

查看全文
  • Frédéric Silvestri,
  • Abhishek Kumar,
  • Maria Christidis,
  • Anastasios Grigoriadis

摘要

Aim

The study aimed to evaluate gaze behavior during tooth preparation assessments by analyzing and comparing eye-tracking metrics between novice and expert groups.

Methods

Thirty-five participants, divided into novices (n = 18, mean age = 22.9 ± 1.5 years) and experts (n = 17, mean age = 44.3 ± 13.1 years), were recruited for this observational study. The novice group consisted of third-year dental students, while the expert group comprised licensed dentists with an average of 18.9 ± 12.7 years of clinical experience. Eye-tracking metrics, including total duration of fixation (TDF), number of fixations (NF), time to first fixation (TFF), and pupil size, were measured across different areas of interest (AOIs). The data was analyzed with a two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) model.

Results

Both novices and experts focused mainly on the “buccal wall” and “margin” (finishing line) AOIs during tooth preparation evaluation. The novices showed significantly longer TDF (P = 0.034), more NF (P = 0.047), and longer TFF (P = 0.021) compared to experts. However, there were no significant differences in pupil diameter between groups or AOIs, indicating similar cognitive load despite differences in visual behavior.

Conclusion

Overall, the novices tend to have longer fixation durations, more frequent fixations, and a delayed time to first fixation compared to experts during tooth preparation assessments. The study also concludes that both novices and experts primarily focus on the buccal wall and finishing line. These differences indicate that visual processing varies between the two groups, with novices demonstrating less efficient visual processing skills. In general, the findings highlight how experience influences gaze behavior in the assessment of tooth preparation.

Clinical significance

These findings can refine pre-clinical prosthodontic education by fostering expert-like visual processing skills, enabling students to better understand and perform prosthodontic tasks. This targeted approach enhances their training and prepares them more effectively for clinical practice.