Can Hobbies Shape Fine Motor Skills Development in First-Year Dental and Oral Health Students?

Can Hobbies Shape Fine Motor Skills Development in First‐Year Dental and Oral Health Students? - PMC Skip to main content An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Here's how you know Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Search Log in Dashboard Publications Account settings Log out Search… Search NCBI Primary site navigation Search Logged in as: Dashboard Publications Account settings Log in Search PMC Full-Text Archive Search in PMC Journal List User Guide PERMALINK Copy As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more: PMC Disclaimer | PMC Copyright Notice Eur J Dent Educ . 2025 Aug 4;30(2):734–742. doi: 10.1111/eje.70021 Search in PMC Search in PubMed View in NLM Catalog Add to search Can Hobbies Shape Fine Motor Skills Development in First‐Year Dental and Oral Health Students? Sowmya Shetty Sowmya Shetty 1 The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia Find articles by Sowmya Shetty 1, ✉ , Carol Tran Carol Tran 1 The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia 2 Private Practitioner Find articles by Carol Tran 1, 2 , Christopher Sexton Christopher Sexton 1 The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia Find articles by Christopher Sexton 1 Author information Article notes Copyright and License information 1 The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia 2 Private Practitioner * Correspondence: Sowmya Shetty ( [email protected] ) ✉ Corresponding author. Revised 2025 May 6; Received 2024 Apr 10; Accepted 2025 Jul 7; Issue date 2026 May. © 2025 The Author(s). European Journal of Dental Education published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. PMC Copyright notice PMCID: PMC13090429  PMID: 40755431 ABSTRACT Introduction Dental students develop fine motor skills that include a complex interplay of finger dexterity, posture and progressive visual‐tactile improvement through spatial awareness and cognition facilitated through university simulation training. Identifying students with a natural aptitude for these skills is vital to make the most of available resources. This study examines the relationship between pre‐existing hobbies and fine motor skills before and after a five‐week training module. Materials and Methods Seventy‐two first‐year students at an Australian University completed a questionnaire that measured their personal interests. Students' performance on a foundational cavity preparation task was assessed before and after five weeks of simulation clinic training on plastic typodont teeth. In‐class assessment tasks aimed to evaluate innate and acquired skills. The relationships between personal interests and cavity preparation skills, before and after the simulation training, were explored. Results The three hobbies with the highest mean cavity preparation percentage at baseline were playing music (51.7%; 95% CI: 41.5, 61.9), cooking (50.3%; 95% CI: 45.1, 55.5) and participating in sports (48.4%; 95% CI: 42.9, 53.8). Estimated mean improvement in cavity preparation was highest for participants that had cooking as the only hobby (19.2%; 95% CI: 14.4, 24.1). Participants with four hobbies had the lowest mean improvement in cavity preparation, with 11.3 (95% CI: 5.1, 17.5) percentage units. Participants with zero hobbies improved by 11.7 (95% CI: 7.7, 15.7) percentage units. Conclusion Cooking at least once a week has a better impact on the mean improvement in scores after formal university simulation training than other hobbies. Students without any identified hobbies might benefit from task‐specific training for fine motor skills improvement. Keywords: dental education, early year dental students, fine motor skills, hobbies, personal interests 1. Introduction Dental professionals require excellent hand–foot and eye coordination, which allows for precise and controlled manipulation of objects within a confined space on an extremely small scale [ 1 , 2 ]. They also need to maintain spatial awareness [ 3 ], develop fine motor skills [ 4 ] within a dental context, and require good cognitive skills and agility in mental rotation tasks [ 5 ]. Undergraduate students in dental and oral health programmes develop fine motor skills and hand‐foot and eye coordination in preclinical simulation spaces to develop competency prior to performing treatments in clinic, assuring patient safety. These early training modules are often expensive to operate as specialised, trained staff and dedicated facilities [ 6 , 7 , 8 ] are required to supervise students completing tasks. These often need many hours of practice [ 9 ] and skills acquisition rates vary within cohorts. Whilst fine motor skills develop through sufficient practice, enhancing a novice learner's pre‐existing aptitude may facilitate quicker development of skills [ 3 , 10 ]. Pre‐admission aptitude tests have been used with varying degrees of success to identify students' fine motor skills' aptitude in the North American countries [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 ]. The American Association of Dental Education [ 2 ] recommends extracurricular activities or hobbies to enhance student success at these pre‐admission aptitude tests, such as drawing, painting, woodcarving, jewellery making, soap carving, sewing, knitting and playing a musical instrument. Currently, there is no evidence in dental literature suggesting that these hobbies improve fine motor dental skills. Educational research in health professions shows a positive correlation between enhanced surgical dexterity skills and activities such as playing a musical instrument [ 5 , 17 ], participating in sports [ 18 ] or playing video games [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. Transferrable skills such as finger dexterity, hand‐eye coordination, controlled body movement, proper posture, enhanced visual‐tactile feedback, bimanual dexterity, and cognitive functions improve with extended musical training [ 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 ]. Active brain remodelling in the cerebellum and motor skills areas seen in extended practice is linked to several personal interest activities such as music, sports and professional cooking [ 25 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ]. Cooking and kitchen‐related activities refine hand‐eye coordination and motor skills in children [ 39 ], aid in cognitive functioning and brain injury rehabilitation [ 40 , 41 ], whilst improving motor coordination, flexible thinking, and strategy implementation [ 42 ]. Brain remodelling effects seen in cooking are similar to extended musical practice [ 25 , 26 , 32 , 35 ]. Varying results were noted for the effect of art and clay moulding [ 43 ], visual art training [ 44 ] and hands‐on wax carving [ 45 ] on manual dexterity. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between pre‐existing hobbies and fine motor skills among dental students. Specifically, we examined whether students who engaged in hobbies demonstrated higher initial levels of manual dexterity than those without hobbies. In addition, we explored whether students with hobbies showed greater improvement in fine motor skills following preclinical training, and whether types of hobbies were associated with enhanced skill development over time. By exploring baseline differences and the trajectory of skill acquisition, this study contributes to a better understanding of how extracurricular activities may support the development of essential clinical competencies in dental education. 2. Materials and Methods Approval for the research project was obtained from the institutional ethics committee under Approval No. 2012000805. A within‐subjects longitudinal study design was used with 72 of 83 (87%) students in the first year of the Bachelor of Dental Science (BDSc) and Bachelor of Oral Health (BOralH) programmes selected using availability sampling. Students who consented to participate were provided with a participant information sheet and a consent form. Students had the freedom to withdraw from the project at any time without facing any academic or other consequences, and their participation had no influence on course assessments. Prior to the start of the first restorative dentistry module in both programmes, these students were provided with a 20‐item questionnaire to assess personal interests or hobbies. The questionnaire categorized these interests into five themes: arts and crafts, cooking and baking skills, sports, musical instruments, and computer gaming. Students were asked to indicate the frequency and duration of their engagement in each theme, allowing an estimation of overall hours spent and mastery level in their respective interests. All questionnaires were coded, and any personal comments were de‐identified to ensure confidentiality. After completing the questionnaire, the students were instructed to perform their very first occlusal cavity preparation on a standardised typodont tooth representing a lower right first permanent molar. Students were provided with health and safety instructions including the safe use of high‐speed equipment. The students were provided with a pre‐recorded video demonstration outlining the basic principles of cavity preparation along with a standard criterion‐referenced marking sheet specifying dimensions for width, depth, and shape of the final preparation. This first task at the start was treated as a baseline cavity preparation task. Following this, students were provided with 20 h of planned preclinical training over 5 weeks. This included formal instruction and feedback from qualified dentists and oral health therapists. After the training period, all students were asked to complete an assessment similar to the first task on a new typodont tooth, and it was treated as the final cavity preparation. Both the baseline and final submissions were evaluated by two experienced examiners, previously calibrated for assessment in preclinical tasks. Both baseline and final preparations were assessed using the criterion‐referenced sheet. Each preparation was marked by both examiners concurrently, and any variations were moderated to produce a single mark for each student. The purpose of the baseline cavity preparation at the beginning of the semester was to determine the students' innate ability, whilst the final assessment for this task aimed to evaluate any change in cavity preparation mark, to assess the acquired skills. The survey data regarding pre‐existing interests or hobbies was used to identify correlations between hobbies and the first and final mark obtained. 3. Statistical Analysis Details of the characteristics for the students that formed the sample were stratified by the number of hobbies performed at least weekly and summarised using summary statistics. Age of students was summarised as median, and minimum and maximum years of age. Multiple responses were allowed for the type of hobbies performed at least once a week; hence, it is possible for percentages to equal more than 100%. Strip plots by the number and type of hobbies were used to display results for the baseline cavity preparation [ 46 ]. The plot shows the individual data points and the variability of scores across the groups. The summary statistics mean and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) summarise the performance of each group. Unadjusted linear regression models were used with the type of hobbies and the number of hobbies predicting the grade at the final cavity preparation. An adjusted linear regression model with final cavity preparation as the outcome was constructed with the predictors: type of hobbies, the number of hobbies, and the covariate baseline cavity preparation. Adjusting for the baseline cavity preparation score will control for initial differences in skill levels of the students. Estimated marginal means were produced to show the expected grade and 95% CI for the unadjusted and adjusted analysis [ 47 ]. As participants could respond to multiple hobbies, all models used a sandwich estimator to adjust standard errors by treating the participant as a cluster [ 48 ]. This adjustment to the standard errors will account for within‐subject correlation due to multiple responses per participant and increase the width of the confidence intervals if there was no adjustment made. The change in cavity preparation percentage was calculated as the final cavity preparation score percentage subtracted by the baseline cavity preparation score percentage. This represents an individual student's change in grade between the baseline cavity preparation and the final one. The estimated mean improvement in cavity preparation for combinations of type and number of hobbies was predicted using a linear regression model. Participant's improvement in percentage from baseline cavity preparation score and grouped estimated means and 95% CI are shown in a strip plot. Analysis was completed using the R version 4.2.1 [ 49 ]. 4. Results There were 60 (83%) Bachelor of Dental Science (Honours) and 12 (17%) Bachelor of Oral Health students out of all 72 participants that completed the baseline and final cavity preparation assessment tasks (Table 1 ). Of the 26 (36%) participants that had at most one hobby, the majority were female (73%). Many of the participants ( n = 65, 90%) indicated that they enjoyed working with their hands. Sport ( n = 38, 53%), cooking ( n = 37, 51%) and video games (32, 44%) were the hobbies that were most likely to be performed at least once a week. Seven (10%) of the 72 participants had no hobbies. TABLE 1. Summary statistics for the sample by characteristics, stratified by the number of hobbies that are performed at least once a week. Characteristics Number of hobbies performed at least once a week 0 to 1 hobbies 2 or more hobbies Overall n (%) n (%) n (%) Gender Female 19 (73) 20 (43) 39 (54) Male 7 (27) 26 (57) 33 (46) Programme BDSc (Hons) a 22 (85) 38 (83) 60 (83) BOralH b 4 (15) 8 (17) 12 (17) Age, Years c 19 (18, 23) 19 (18, 39) 19 (18, 39) Enjoys working with their hands Yes 22 (85) 43 (93) 65 (90) No 4 (15) 3 (7) 5 (7) Hobbies performed at least once a week d Sport 6 (23) 32 (70) 38 (53) Cook 7 (27) 30 (65) 37 (51) Video games 4 (15) 28 (61) 32 (44) Music 2 (8) 14 (30) 16 (22) Crafts 0 (0) 13 (28) 13 (18) Open in a new tab a Bachelor of Dental Science (Honours). b Bachelor of Oral Health. c Summarised as median (Minimum, Maximum). d Multiple responses were possible. The highest mean cavity preparation at baseline was by participants with one hobby at 55.8% (95% CI: 47.2, 64.4), as shown in Figure 1 . Participants with no hobbies had a mean cavity preparation percentage of 42.7% (95% CI: 15.2, 57.9). The three hobbies with the highest mean cavity preparation percentage at baseline were playing music (51.7%; 95% CI: 41.5, 61.9), cooking (50.3%; 95% CI: 45.1, 55.5) and participating in sports (48.4%; 95% CI: 42.9, 53.8). FIGURE 1. Open in a new tab Results from the first (baseline) cavity preparation activity by the number and type of hobbies that the students complete on a weekly basis. Table 2 presents the expected performance in final cavity preparation for the type and number of hobbies relative to participants with no hobbies. The expected grade for the final cavity preparation for participants that had cooking as a hobby was 7.4 (95% CI: 3.0, 9.5) percentage units higher than for participants with no hobbies, whilst those with one hobby overall had a grade that was 8.6 (95% CI: 0.6, 16.6) percentage units higher than for participants with no hobby. TABLE 2. Unadjusted and adjusted linear regression coefficients and estimated mean grade for type of hobby and number of hobbies. Unadjusted analysis Adjusted analysis a Beta‐coefficient (95% CI) p Estimated mean grade (95% CI) Beta‐coefficient (95% CI) p Estimated mean grade b (95% CI) Hobbies Cooking 7.4 (3.0, 11.8) 0.001 65.8 (62.8, 68.8) 3.1 (−4.9, 11.1) 0.45 66.9 (62.4, 71.4) Sports 5.2 (0.9, 9.5) 0.02 62.6 (60.7, 66.6) 1.4 (−6.7, 9.5) 0.73 65.2 (60.7, 69.7) Music 3.6 (−2.2, 9.3) 0.22 62.0 (57.4, 66.5) −0.4 (−9.0, 8.2) 0.93 63.4 (57.7, 69.1) Crafts 3.5 (−2.1, 9.2) 0.22 61.9 (56.9, 67.0) 2.1 (−6.7, 10.7) 0.63 65.9 (59.5, 72.3) Video games 2.8 (−1.7, 7.3) 0.22 61.2 (58.0, 64.4) 0.01 (−8.1, 8.1) 0.99 63.8 (59.1, 68.6) No hobbies Ref . 58.4 (51.5, 65.3) Ref . e Number of Hobbies Zero R ef . 58.4 (51.5, 65.2) c e One 8.6 (0.6, 16.6) 0.04 67.0 (62.8, 71.1) 4.5 (−1.6, 10.5) 0.15 66.9 (62.4, 71.4) Two 6.9 (0.8, 14.7) 0.08 65.3 (61.7, 68.9) 3.6 (−1.6, 8.7) 0.17 66.0 (62.8, 69.3) Three 3.1 (−5.1, 11.2) 0.45 61.5 (57.1, 65.9) 1.5 (−3.4, 6.4) 0.55 63.9 (60.3, 67.5) Four 0.0 (−11.3, 11.4) 0.99 58.4 (49.4, 67.5) d 62.5 (57.5, 67.5) Open in a new tab Abbreviation: Ref, Reference category for the regression models. a Adjusted for type of hobby, number of hobbies and grade of first attempt at cavity preparation. R 2 = 0.22. b Expected scores are at mean grade of first attempt at cavity preparation and controlling the number of hobbies at 1 or the type of hobby as music. c Reported as No hobbies. d Estimate not calculable. e Not reported due to not meeting requirements of B. After adjusting for the participant's grade at the baseline cavity preparation and number of hobbies, the mean score by participants that had cooking as a hobby was 3.1 (95% CI: −4.9, 11.1) percentage units higher than the expected performance by participants with no hobbies. Participants with one hobby had a mean grade of 4.5 (95% CI: 1.6, 10.5) percentage units higher than participants with no hobbies, after adjusting for the participant's grade at the baseline cavity preparation and the type of hobby. For participants that had more than one hobby, the expected relative performance for the final cavity preparation percentage decreased as the participant's number of hobbies increased to a maximum of four hobbies. The estimated mean improvement in cavity preparation was highest for participants that had cooking as a hobby (19.2%; 95% CI: 14.4, 24.1) and as the only hobby (Figure 2 ). Participants with four hobbies had the lowest mean improvement in cavity preparation percentage (11.3%; 95% CI: 5.1, 17.5). Participants with zero hobbies improved in cavity preparation by 11.7 (95% CI: 7.7, 15.7) percentage units. FIGURE 2. Open in a new tab Estimated marginal mean improvement in percentage for the cavity preparation activity by the number and type of hobby and adjusted for percentage from first cavity preparation or baseline mark. A change of zero represents no improvement in percentage. 5. Discussion Our study showed that participants who practise at least one hobby regularly had higher baseline scores compared to those that did not practise a hobby at all. The three highest baseline scores correlated to students that played a musical instrument, cooked or played a sport, with the most mean improvement seen in students that cooked regularly and only practised one hobby. Existing literature has indicated a correlation between playing a musical instrument [ 17 , 23 ] and improved medical simulated preclinical skills, attributable to a complex interplay of skills that is developed in musicians who have had extended training over years [ 24 , 25 ] such as improved fine motor control, finger dexterity, hand‐eye coordination, gross motor coordination, body movement, posture and breathing, sensorimotor feedback and visual and tactile feedback. However, this high performing group at baseline did not maintain the same trajectory with improving their scores as would have been expected by the theory of magnification [ 50 ]. This contrasted with a 2018 study [ 30 ] where the musical group had sustained their high manual dexterity skills on a 12‐month review, compared to sports and control groups. Research has demonstrated that when sequencing is unfamiliar, musicians will demonstrate quicker response times and higher accuracy in tasks compared to non‐musicians despite having similar initiation times [ 51 ], and the difference between musicians and non‐musicians is reduced once non‐musicians have had time to visualise and memorise the sequences, or practise the tasks [ 51 ]. This is to some degree explained by a theory of compensation through practice for a lack of skills, contrasting with the theory of skills development where the expectation is that more practice would simply continue to magnify any pre‐existing abilities [ 50 ]. Cooking and other kitchen‐related tasks were also seen to have a high baseline score (50.3%; 95% CI: 45.1, 55.5). Additionally, this group had the most mean improvement in score (19.2%; 95% CI: 14.4, 24.1) when practising only one hobby (Figure 2 ). Cooking involves executive functions like self‐control, memory recall, task‐switching, and sustained focus, whilst also requiring strategic planning, prioritisation, and real‐time adjustments based on cooking progress [ 38 ]. Apart from these functions, professional cooking requires the acquisition of new motor skills and precise bimanual coordination to optimise the simultaneous preparation of food and maintain quality [ 38 ]. A systematic review found that cooking‐related interventions are also employed with varying degrees of success in the rehabilitation of adults with acquired brain injury [ 40 ]. The benefits of kitchen‐related tasks or cooking have also been co‐related to the refinement of hand‐eye coordination as well as fine and gross motor skills in children [ 39 ]. Strong correlations have been found for stroke in‐patients between functional cooking and neuropsychological performance [ 52 ], including attention, working memory, verbal fluency, orientation, perception, visuomotor organisation, and thinking operations. This suggests that engaging in cooking could foster the refinement of existing fine motor skills even after acquired brain injury and could explain how this group has demonstrated the most improvement from the baseline cavity preparation stage as well. The final group with top three baseline scores was for participants that practised a sport. Neuroimaging studies on long‐term athletes have indicated that there is active remodelling of the brain specifically in the cerebellum [ 34 , 35 ], which is related to motor skills development like that seen in both musicians [ 36 , 37 ] and professional chefs [ 38 ]. Whilst both musicians and athletes seem to depend on accurate timing in body movements, the latter utilise uninterrupted, fluid movements [ 53 ] in contrast to precise repetitive actions that are cyclic or rhythmic in musicians. Both types of movements seem to promote gross and fine motor skills development over sustained practice [ 33 ]. The estimated mean improvement in cavity preparation was highest for participants that only cooked as a hobby. Participants with up to four hobbies, including the top performing at baseline such as cooking, playing an instrument, or sport, had in fact the lowest mean improvement in cavity preparation percentage (11.3%; 95% CI: 5.1, 17.5) which was comparable to those with no hobbies, whose cavity preparation improved by 11.7% (95% CI: 7.7, 15.7) percentage units. Previous literature showed sustained musical practice over a long period of time demonstrated physical changes were imprinted in important areas of the brain related to motion and coordination [ 37 , 54 , 55 ]. In fact, sustained practice of any skill over time has this effect [ 33 ]. Practising one specific skill or hobby potentially magnifies the improvement in fine motor skills in contrast to when multiple hobbies are practised with shorter or less frequent practice time allocated. This indicates that practising one hobby, instead of multiple hobbies, frequently over a sustained period may have a better impact on fine motor skill acquisition. These findings have significant implications for both intervention strategies and the current approach to preclinical training. A more learner‐centred model could be implemented by categorizing students into different skill advancement groups based on their proficiency levels. Those requiring additional practice could receive more formal training and be encouraged to engage in relevant hobbies early in their academic journey, fostering skill development over time. Moreover, resource allocation could be optimised by placing high‐performing students such as those who play an instrument, frequently cook from scratch, or play a sport into advanced skills groups that require less supervision or fewer training hours, allowing educators to focus more on students who need additional support. This approach not only enhances efficiency in training but also ensures that students receive instruction tailored to their individual needs and have a more homogenous training need for the subsequent skills modules. By adopting a structured framework for skill advancement, institutions can better prepare students for practical applications, ultimately improving their overall competency and confidence in real‐world settings. The study's limitations arise from its dependence on self‐reported data regarding personal interests, hobbies, and past experiences obtained through surveys, which might introduce biases or inaccuracies. Furthermore, students may not accurately recall the precise frequency of their engagement in hobbies, leaving some entries blank, especially in activities such as casual practice of arts and crafts, as opposed to more structured activities such as musical or sports practice, which involve long‐term formal training from childhood. Participants were not specifically selected based on criteria such as the type of musical instrument played or the cooking skill most utilised, to evaluate their correlation with fine motor skills. Instead, these activities were self‐reported in terms of how often and for how long they were practised. The presence of various background and demographic variables added complexity, potentially obscuring any causal effects that might have been observable. In hindsight, our study would have been more effective by focusing on specific domains and implementing an intervention to confirm the legitimacy of any causal relationship. Subsequent research will delve deeper into the highest‐performing groups to thoroughly investigate this association. Another constraint of this study is the utilisation of authentic criteria‐referenced assessment tasks for establishing baseline and final scores. A standardised test such as those used for dental admissions tests should have been employed to measure motor acuity in a standardised format, rather than preparation on a 3D complex model such as the plastic tooth. The examiners were experienced and have conducted these assessments for previous cohorts with very little deviation at the final cavity preparation stage, which was the only formal assessment prior to this study implementation. The scores for the baseline scores demonstrate the naturally occurring wide range of skills' levels present in untrained first‐year students. Assessing student performance prior to clinical placements and monitoring their continuation of hobbies as a means for investigating the potential development of hand‐foot and eye coordination over the course of the preclinical programme and into clinical years should have been investigated. This could have provided insights into whether skills acquisition improved, remained consistent, or declined over time. 6. Conclusions Participants that practised at least one hobby regularly had higher scores for baseline cavity preparation compared to those who did not practise a hobby at all. The highest baseline scores were from groups that played a musical instrument, cooked, or played a sport. However, this gap was much smaller with adjusted final cavity preparation scores, indicating that the group with no hobbies will benefit more from task‐specific training compared to those who practised a hobby beneficial to improving hand‐eye coordination. Author Contributions Sowmya Shetty led the conceptualization, collection of data and the original draft writing, a supporting role in the formal analysis and interpretation of results, an equal role in review and editing and approval of final manuscript. Carol Tran led the conceptualization including ethics approval process, data collection, and had an equal role in the draft review and editing and approval of final manuscript. Christopher Sexton led the formal analysis, reporting on results, along with an equal role in the final draft review and editing and approval of final manuscript. Ethics Statement The University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Approval No. 2012000805. Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Acknowledgements Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Queensland, as part of the Wiley ‐ The University of Queensland agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians. Shetty S., Tran C., and Sexton C., “Can Hobbies Shape Fine Motor Skills Development in First‐Year Dental and Oral Health Students?,” European Journal of Dental Education 30, no. 2 (2026): 734–742, 10.1111/eje.70021. Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work. Data Availability Statement The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. References 1. Lugassy D., Levanon Y., Pilo R., et al., “Predicting the Clinical Performance of Dental Students With a Manual Dexterity Test,” PLoS One 13, no. 3 (2018): e0193980. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 2. American Dental Education Association , “The Importance of Manual Dexterity,” (2024), accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.adea.org/GoDental/health‐professions‐advisors/supporting‐students/the‐importance‐of‐manual‐dexterity . 3. Hegarty M., Keehner M., Khooshabeh P., and Montello D. R., “How Spatial Abilities Enhance, and Are Enhanced by, Dental Education,” Learning and Individual Differences 19, no. 1 (2009): 61–70. [ Google Scholar ] 4. Cho G. C., Chee W. W., and Tan D. T., “Dental Students' Ability to Evaluate Themselves in Fixed Prosthodontics,” Journal of Dental Education 74, no. 11 (2010): 1237–1242. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 5. Clouet R., Gaudin A., Tourtelier J., Gogendeau C., Serisier S., and Prud'homme T., “Analyzing the Influence of Video Game and Music Engagement on Technical Skills Acquisition in Dental Students in Preclinical Phase: Protocol for a Prospective, Controlled, Longitudinal Study,” JMIR Research Protocols 13 (2024): e55738. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 6. Tedesco L., “Issues in Dental Curriculum Development and Change,” Journal of Dental Education 59, no. 1 (1995): 97–147, 10.1002/j.0022-0337.1995.59.1.tb02922.x. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 7. Glickman G., Gluskin A., Johnson W., and Lin J., “The Crisis in Endodontic Education: Current Perspectives and Strategies for Change,” Journal of Endodontics 31, no. 4 (2005): 255–261, 10.1097/01.don.0000158009.34525.e3. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 8. McNally M., Dunning D., Lange B., and Gound T., “A Survey of Endodontic Residents' Attitudes About a Career in Dental Education,” Journal of Endodontics 28, no. 8 (2002): 592–594, 10.1097/00004770-200208000-00007. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 9. El‐Kishawi M., Khalaf K., and Winning T., “Understanding Motor Skill Learning as Related to Dentistry,” Dentistry Journal 9, no. 6 (2021): 68, 10.3390/dj9060068. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 10. Ballard R. W., Hagan J. L., and Cheramie T., “Relationship Between Hand‐Skill Exercises and Other Admissions Criteria and Students' Performance in Dental School,” Journal of Dental Education 79, no. 5 (2015): 557–562. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 11. American Dental Education Association , “Dental Admission Test (DAT),” (2024), accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.adea.org/godental/dental‐admission‐test‐(dat) . 12. Gray S. A., Deem L. P., and Straja S. R., “Are Traditional Cognitive Tests Useful in Predicting Clinical Success?,” Journal of Dental Education 66, no. 11 (2002): 1241–1245. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 13. Husbands A. and Dowell J., “Predictive Validity of the Dundee Multiple Mini‐Interview,” Medical Education 47, no. 7 (2013): 717–725. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 14. Sandow P. L., Jones A. C., Peek C. W., Courts F. J., and Watson R. E., “Correlation of Admission Criteria With Dental School Performance and Attrition,” Journal of Dental Education 66, no. 3 (2002): 385–392. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 15. Cleghorn B. M., Brillant M., Kraglund F., Seth S., and Garland H. W., “Value of the Manual Dexterity Test as a Screening Tool for Dental School Admissions,” Journal of Dental Education 82, no. 8 (2018): 878–882. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 16. Gray S. A. and Deem L. P., “Predicting Student Performance in Preclinical Technique Courses Using the Theory of Ability Determinants of Skilled Performance,” Journal of Dental Education 66, no. 6 (2002): 721–727. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 17. Rao N., Swaby J., and Nehra D., “Can a Hobby Influence Medical Students' Suturing Skills?,” Bulletin of the Royal College of Surgeons of England 97, no. 9 (2015): 387–391. [ Google Scholar ] 18. Zeng W., Woodhouse J., and Brunt L. M., “Do Preclinical Background and Clerkship Experiences Impact Skills Performance in an Accelerated Internship Preparation Course for Senior Medical Students?,” Surgery 148, no. 4 (2010): 768–776. discussion 776–767. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 19. Adams B. J., Margaron F., and Kaplan B. J., “Comparing Video Games and Laparoscopic Simulators in the Development of Laparoscopic Skills in Surgical Residents,” Journal of Surgical Education 69, no. 6 (2012): 714–717. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 20. Ou Y., McGlone E. R., Camm C. F., and Khan O. A., “Does Playing Video Games Improve Laparoscopic Skills?,” International Journal of Surgery 11, no. 5 (2013): 365–369. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 21. Dorval M. and Pépin M., “Effect of Playing a Video Game on a Measure of Spatial Visualization,” Perceptual and Motor Skills 62, no. 1 (1986): 159–162. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 22. De Lisi R. and Wolford J. L., “Improving Children's Mental Rotation Accuracy With Computer Game Playing,” Journal of Genetic Psychology 163, no. 3 (2002): 272–282. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 23. Armbrust L., Lenz M., Elrod J., et al., “Factors Influencing Performance in Laparoscopic Suturing and Knot Tying: A Cohort Study,” European Journal of Pediatric Surgery 33, no. 2 (2023): 144–151. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 24. Furuya S. and Altenmüller E., “Acquisition and Reacquisition of Motor Coordination in Musicians,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1337, no. 1 (2015): 118–124. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 25. Toader C., Tataru C. P., Florian I.‐A., et al., “Cognitive Crescendo: How Music Shapes the Brain's Structure and Function,” Brain Sciences 13, no. 10 (2023): 1390. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 26. Costa‐Giomi E., “Does Music Instruction Improve Fine Motor Abilities?,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1060, no. 1 (2005): 262–264. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 27. Forgeard M., Winner E., Norton A., and Schlaug G., “Practicing a Musical Instrument in Childhood Is Associated With Enhanced Verbal Ability and Nonverbal Reasoning,” PLoS One 3, no. 10 (2008): e3566. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 28. Hyde K. L., Lerch J., Norton A., et al., “Musical Training Shapes Structural Brain Development,” Journal of Neuroscience 29, no. 10 (2009): 3019–3025. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 29. James C. E., Zuber S., Dupuis‐Lozeron E., Abdili L., Gervaise D., and Kliegel M., “Formal String Instrument Training in a Class Setting Enhances Cognitive and Sensorimotor Development of Primary School Children,” Frontiers in Neuroscience 14 (2020): 567. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 30. Martins M., Neves L., Rodrigues P., Vasconcelos O., and Castro S. L., “Orff‐Based Music Training Enhances Children's Manual Dexterity and Bimanual Coordination,” Frontiers in Psychology 9 (2018): 2616. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 31. Bugos J. A., “The Effects of Bimanual Coordination in Music Interventions on Executive Functions in Aging Adults,” Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience 13 (2019): 68. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 32. Kopiez R., Galley N., and Lehmann A. C., “The Relation Between Lateralisation, Early Start of Training, and Amount of Practice in Musicians: A Contribution to the Problem of Handedness Classification,” Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition 15, no. 4 (2010): 385–414. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 33. Chang Y., “Reorganization and Plastic Changes of the Human Brain Associated With Skill Learning and Expertise,” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8 (2014): e35, 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00035. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 34. Di Paola M., Caltagirone C., and Petrosini L., “Prolonged Rock Climbing Activity Induces Structural Changes in Cerebellum and Parietal Lobe,” Human Brain Mapping 34, no. 10 (2013): 2707–2714, 10.1002/hbm.22095. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 35. Park I. S., Lee K. J., Han J. W., et al., “Experience‐Dependent Plasticity of Cerebellar Vermis in Basketball Players,” Cerebellum 8, no. 3 (2009): 334–339, 10.1007/s12311-009-0100-1. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 36. Han Y., Yang H., Lv Y. T., et al., “Gray Matter Density and White Matter Integrity in Pianists' Brain: A Combined Structural and Diffusion Tensor MRI Study,” Neuroscience Letters 459, no. 1 (2009): 3–6, 10.1016/j.neulet.2008.07.056. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 37. Gaser C. and Schlaug G., “Brain Structures Differ Between Musicians and Non‐Musicians,” Journal of Neuroscience 23, no. 27 (2003): 9240–9245, 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.23-27-09240.2003. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 38. Cerasa A., Sarica A., Martino I., et al., “Increased Cerebellar Gray Matter Volume in Head Chefs,” PLoS One 12, no. 2 (2017): e0171457, 10.1371/journal.pone.0171457. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 39. Dean M., O'Kane C., Issartel J., et al., “Guidelines for Designing Age‐Appropriate Cooking Interventions for Children: The Development of Evidence‐Based Cooking Skill Recommendations for Children, Using a Multidisciplinary Approach,” Appetite 161 (2021): e105125, 10.1016/j.appet.2021.105125. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 40. Mohapatra S. and Kulnik S. T., “Kitchen‐Related Tasks Used in Occupational Therapy During Rehabilitation of Adults With Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review,” British Journal of Occupational Therapy 84, no. 1 (2021): 22–41, 10.1177/0308022620950975. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ] 41. Neistadt M. E., “The Effects of Different Treatment Activities on Functional Fine Motor Coordination in Adults With Brain Injury,” American Journal of Occupational Therapy 48, no. 10 (1994): 877–882, 10.5014/ajot.48.10.877. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 42. Cerasa A., Arcuri F., Pignataro L. M., et al., “The Cooking Therapy for Cognitive Rehabilitation of Cerebellar Damage: A Case Report and a Review of the Literature,” Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 59 (2019): 357–361, 10.1016/j.jocn.2018.09.026. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 43. Güneron E., Kivrak N., Koyuncu S., Tuncer S., and Uysal A., “Aesthetic Surgery Training: The Role of Art Education,” Aesthetic Surgery Journal 25, no. 1 (2005): 84–86. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 44. Card E. B., Mauch J. T., and Lin I. C., “Learner Drawing and Sculpting in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review,” Journal of Surgical Research 267 (2021): 577–585. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 45. Imbery T. A., Goolsby S. P., Janus C., and Stilianoudakis S., “Wax Carving Exercises Predict Performance on Practical Examinations for First‐Year Dental Students,” Journal of Dental Education 86, no. 3 (2022): 301–309. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 46. Wickham H., ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer‐Verlag, 2016). [ Google Scholar ] 47. Lüdecke D., “Ggeffects: Tidy Data Frames of Marginal Effects From Regression Models,” Journal of Open Source Software 3, no. 26 (2018): 772. [ Google Scholar ] 48. Zeileis A., Köll S., and Graham N., “Various Versatile Variances: An Object‐Oriented Implementation of Clustered Covariances in r,” Journal of Statistical Software 95, no. 1 (2020): 1–36. [ Google Scholar ] 49. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing [Computer Program]. Vienna, Austria (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2022), https://www.R‐project.org/ . [ Google Scholar ] 50. Lövdén M., Brehmer Y., Li S.‐C., and Lindenberger U., “Training‐Induced Compensation Versus Magnification of Individual Differences in Memory Performance,” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 6 (2012): 141. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 51. Sobierajewicz J., Naskręcki R., Jaśkowski W., and Van der Lubbe R. H. J., “Do Musicians Learn a Fine Sequential Hand Motor Skill Differently Than Non‐Musicians?,” PLoS One 13, no. 11 (2018): e0207449. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 52. Yantz C. L., Johnson‐Greene D., Higginson C., and Emmerson L., “Functional Cooking Skills and Neuropsychological Functioning in Patients With Stroke: An Ecological Validity Study,” Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 20, no. 5 (2010): 725–738, 10.1080/09602011003765690. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 53. Balague N., Torrents C., Hristovski R., Davids K., and Araújo D., “Overview of Complex Systems in Sport,” Journal of Systems Science and Complexity 26, no. 1 (2013): 4–13. [ Google Scholar ] 54. Galińska E., “Music Therapy in Neurological Rehabilitation Settings,” Psychiatria Polska 49, no. 4 (2015): 835–846. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 55. Leipold S., Klein C., and Jäncke L., “Musical Expertise Shapes Functional and Structural Brain Networks Independent of Absolute Pitch Ability,” Journal of Neuroscience 41, no. 11 (2021): 2496–2511. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Associated Data This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article. Data Availability Statement The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Articles from European Journal of Dental Education are provided here courtesy of Wiley ACTIONS View on publisher site PDF (433.8 KB) Cite Collections Permalink PERMALINK Copy RESOURCES Similar articles Cited by other articles Links to NCBI Databases Cite Copy Download .nbib .nbib Format: AMA APA MLA NLM Add to Collections Create a new collection Add to an existing collection Name your collection * Choose a collection Unable to load your collection due to an error Please try again Add Cancel Follow NCBI NCBI on X (formerly known as Twitter) NCBI on Facebook NCBI on LinkedIn NCBI on GitHub NCBI RSS feed Connect with NLM NLM on X (formerly known as Twitter) NLM on Facebook NLM on YouTube National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894 Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure Help Accessibility Careers NLM NIH HHS USA.gov Back to Top