Use of YouTube as a Learning Modality for Clinical Procedures among Dental Students in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia—A Cross-Sectional Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

YouTube may be more referred as the online video platform instead of social media.

The significance is not clear.

The control group is missing.

Please visualize the results.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
Greetings!

Firstly I would like to thank you for your valuable inputs, and would like to inform you that we have considered all the valuable comments suggested by you and have modified the manuscript as per your suggestions.

We are also providing point to point clarifications for the comments suggested by you.  "Please see the attachment."

We have modified the manuscript to best of our knowledge, kindly consider the same and oblige,

Thank you and regards

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Sanjeev B Khanagar (Corresponding Author)

 

Reviewer 1

YouTube may be more referred as the online video platform instead of social media.

Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion however, we have referred several articles where YouTube has been considered as social media platform. Below are few reference articles for the same. So we kindly request you to consider the same.

[1. Naguib, G.H.; Alyamani, I.; Alnowaiser, A.M.; Hamed, M.T. Social Media Usage and Self Perception among Dental Students at King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia. Journal of Medical Education 2018, 17, doi:10.22037/jme.v17i2.21416.

2. Uma, E.; Nieminen, P.; Mani, S.A.; John, J.; Haapanen, E.; Laitala, M.-L.; Lappalainen, O.-P.; Varghase, E.; Arora, A.; Kaur, K. Social Media Usage among Dental Undergraduate Students—a Comparative Study. Healthcare 2021, 9, 1408, doi:10.3390/healthcare9111408.]

 

The significance is not clear.

Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion, we have added the significance in the conclusion session of the article.

[The recently increased availability and use of online videos presents an opportunity for undergraduate students, postgraduates, and even faculty members to have new learning tools and teaching methods. Thus, there is a need for dental faculty to review and recommend YouTube videos to ensure their reliability and usefulness. The majority of the dental students in our study felt that YouTube videos suggested by the faculty are more valuable than videos identified from normal searches. Therefore, it is essential for the faculty to guide the students in finding useful YouTube content, and to post tutorials for clinical procedures on YouTube.]

The control group is missing.

Response: The study design adopted for this study is a cross sectional observation study, hence there is no control group in this study design

Please visualize the results.

Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion, we have modified the results as per the suggestions

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Please offer more details about the data analysis methodology implemented. 

Regards

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
Greetings!

Firstly I would like to thank you for your valuable inputs, and would like to inform you that we have considered all the valuable comments suggested by you and have modified the manuscript as per your suggestions.

We are also providing point to point clarifications for the comments suggested by you.  "Please see the attachment."

We have modified the manuscript to best of our knowledge, kindly consider the same and oblige,

Thank you and regards

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Sanjeev B Khanagar (Corresponding Author)

 

Reviewer 2

Please offer more details about the data analysis methodology implemented. 

Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion, we have added details in the sections as per the suggestion

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper deals with the interesting topic of learning using YouTube material in the dental medicine student population. The research is well designed, but the presentation of the results is full of shortcomings that need to be corrected.

Authors are asked to consider the following corrections in their work:

-          The construct 'normal searching' does not describe the search method that results in finding the target content. It is suggested that you use the 'keyword web search' construct

-          In Table 1, when answering the question of which academic year the student is in - the answers offered are random. Please use an ascending sequence of numbers from 1 - 6.

-          You have the same problem in Table 2, where the answers to the questions are also arranged randomly. This is very incomprehensible for the average reader who expects some order in the presentation of the results. Please arrange the answers in a logical sequence from more to less or vice versa (e.g. strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree)

-          In table 3, you have presented the results divided by 6 faculties of dental medicine. In the materials and methods, write exactly that you need a sample of at least 294 study participants for statistical significance. That is why the results divided by faculties have no statistical significance and should not be stated. Even the results divided by gender have no statistical significance. That is why only what has the necessary statistical significance should be kept as a result, and everything else is pointless to comment on

-          Table 3 extends to 6 pages. The table header is only on the first page. This makes it very difficult to understand the results. The reader must understand at all times what the number refers to, so you need to rearrange the design of this table.

-          Additional remarks to table 4 are: the questions are too long, write them in some abbreviated form, and put the entire questionnaire in the supplement; the answers to the questions are again given randomly - please order them in a logical way; to the question 'How do you consider YouTube as a learning tool when it comes to clinical procedures - answer ‘all of the above' was offered as the 2nd and not the last option; it is also not clear how this answer differs from the answer ‘Sometimes as a main source and sometimes adjunctive to labs and lectures’- please explain; to the question 'Would you prefer dental school to post tutorials....the first answer offered is incomprehensible…

-          In the discussion, you used works that refer mainly to Saudi Arabia. There is no reason to leave out of the discussion works from other parts of the world that refer to the same issue.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
Greetings of the day!

Firstly I would like to sincerely thank you for your valuable inputs, and would like to inform you that we have considered your valuable comments and have modified the manuscript as per your suggestions.

We are also providing point to point clarifications for the comments suggested by you. "Please see the attachment."

We have modified the manuscript to best of our knowledge, kindly consider the same and oblige,

Thank you and regards

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Sanjeev B Khanagar (Corresponding Author)

 

Reviewer 3

The paper deals with the interesting topic of learning using YouTube material in the dental medicine student population. The research is well designed, but the presentation of the results is full of shortcomings that need to be corrected.

Response: Firstly we sincerely thank you for your valuable suggestions, which have drastically improvised our manuscript. We have considered all your valuable suggestions and made the changes in the manuscript as per the suggestion

The construct 'normal searching' does not describe the search method that results in finding the target content. It is suggested that you use the 'keyword web search' construct

Response: Thank you, we have made the changes in the manuscript as per the suggestions

In Table 1, when answering the question of which academic year the student is in - the answers offered are random. Please use an ascending sequence of numbers from 1 - 6.

Response: Thank you the valuable suggestion, we have made the changes in the manuscript as per the suggestions

You have the same problem in Table 2, where the answers to the questions are also arranged randomly. This is very incomprehensible for the average reader who expects some order in the presentation of the results. Please arrange the answers in a logical sequence from more to less or vice versa (e.g. strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree)

Response: We have considered the valuable suggestions and have made the changes in the manuscript as per the suggestions

In table 3, you have presented the results divided by 6 faculties of dental medicine. In the materials and methods, write exactly that you need a sample of at least 294 study participants for statistical significance. That is why the results divided by faculties have no statistical significance and should not be stated. Even the results divided by gender have no statistical significance. That is why only what has the necessary statistical significance should be kept as a result, and everything else is pointless to comment on.

Response: We have considered the valuable suggestions and have made the changes in the manuscript as per the suggestions, however we have included non-significant results as well in order avoid publication bias, so kindly consider.

Table 3 extends to 6 pages. The table header is only on the first page. This makes it very difficult to understand the results. The reader must understand at all times what the number refers to, so you need to rearrange the design of this table.

Response: We have considered the suggestions and have made the changes in the table, kindly consider.

Additional remarks to table 4 are: the questions are too long, write them in some abbreviated form, and put the entire questionnaire in the supplement; the answers to the questions are again given randomly - please order them in a logical way; to the question 'How do you consider YouTube as a learning tool when it comes to clinical procedures - answer ‘all of the above' was offered as the 2nd and not the last option; it is also not clear how this answer differs from the answer ‘Sometimes as a main source and sometimes adjunctive to labs and lectures’- please explain; to the question 'Would you prefer dental school to post tutorials....the first answer offered is incomprehensible…

Response: We have considered your valuable suggestions and added codes to the questions and added a new supplementary table with the detailed statements.  

We thank you for highlighting the mistakes, we have made the changes in the table, kindly consider.

Please explain; to the question 'Would you prefer dental school to post tutorials....the first answer offered is incomprehensible…

Response: In this questionnaire only this question was an open-ended questionnaire, so this statement was mentioned by one of the participant.

In the discussion, you used works that refer mainly to Saudi Arabia. There is no reason to leave out of the discussion works from other parts of the world that refer to the same issue.

Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion, we have added more details of the studies conducted in other parts of the world in the discussion section. Kindly consider.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Thank you for writing the manuscript on the most current trend in our specialty.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
Greetings!

Firstly I would like to thank you for your kind words of appreciation and encouragement. We have considered all the valuable suggestions of the reviewers and made the changes as per their suggestions.

 

Thank you and regards

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Sanjeev B Khanagar (Corresponding Author)

 

Reviewer 4

Thank you for writing the manuscript on the most current trend in our specialty.

Response: Thank you very much for the kind words of appreciation and encouragement

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have given comprehensive response to the reviewer and the reviewer agreed to accept it.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
Greetings!

Thank you for accepting our revisions

 

Thank you and regards

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Sanjeev B Khanagar (Corresponding Author)

 

Reviewer 1

The authors have given comprehensive response to the reviewer and the reviewer agreed to accept it.

Response: Thank you for accepting our revisions

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper has been significantly revised, which has raised its quality. I suggest that in the introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion, a more detailed explanation should be given as to why the analysis shown in Table 3 had to be made. Namely, the authors assume that there is a difference in the answers of students between the different examined faculties. This assumption should somehow be supported by arguments - let's say that these faculties are ranked differently, or have a different curriculum, or have more or less practical classes...

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
Greetings of the day!

Firstly I would like to sincerely thank you for your valuable inputs, and would like to inform you that we have considered your valuable comments and have modified the manuscript as per your suggestions.

We are also providing point to point clarifications for the comments suggested by you. "Please see the attachment."

We have modified the manuscript to best of our knowledge, kindly consider the same and oblige,

Thank you and regards

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Sanjeev B Khanagar (Corresponding Author)

 

Reviewer 3

The paper has been significantly revised, which has raised its quality. I suggest that in the introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion, a more detailed explanation should be given as to why the analysis shown in Table 3 had to be made. Namely, the authors assume that there is a difference in the answers of students between the different examined faculties. This assumption should somehow be supported by arguments - let's say that these faculties are ranked differently, or have a different curriculum, or have more or less practical classes...

Response: Thank you for your kind words of appreciation.

In the present study even though there were statistical significance for most of the responses with respect to various universities, it could be due to the uneven distribution of the study participants, or it could also be due to more usage of online mode of education during the COVID-19 pandemic among the universities . Additional to this our study did not explore the usage of YouTube among the universities prior, and after the pandemic, which could have provided more accurate findings.

We have added the same statements in the discussion section after considering the reviewer’s valuable suggestions, kindly consider.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx