###### Abstract
In both fourth and fifth academic grades, endodontic treatment is always performed under the supervision of an endodontic consultants (or specialist) staff, with an average staff-to-student ratio being 1:5 and 1:8, respectively. During the internship clinical year, the senior students are allowed to treat the vital and non-vital teeth and re-treat the failed root canal treated teeth using hand conventional and pro-taper root canal preparatory instruments after using an electronic apex locator in the identification of working length (which they are not allowed to use before), under the supervision of the mentors with an average staff-to-student ratio 1:10, excluding the cases that are subjected to complication. Because of the importance of RCT performed by dental students as a part of community service, several distributed studies regarding the evaluation of the technical quality of RCT performed by dental students have been conducted. Table 1 shows the results of a meta-analysis carried out by the authors (M.A.M., K.S., and M.B.) on studies performed in the last 10 years on the adequacy of RCT by undergraduates. The analysis was made to examine the literature describing the adequacy of RCT by undergraduates and to review the prevalence of iatrogenic errors that happened during RCT by different dental grades. Four electronic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched using the keywords \"root canal treatment, endodontics, dental students, undergraduates\". Means and standard deviations were calculated depending on the means of each study. The analysis included all clinical studies by undergraduates in different continents in the period from January 2011 to December 2021. The preclinical, systematic reviews, and questionnaire studies were excluded. The studies were performed in Africa [14; 15; 16], Europe [17; 18; 19; 20], America [21; 22; 23], and Asia [24; 25; 26; 27; 28; 29; 30; 31; 32; 33; 34; 35; 36; 37; 38]. Systematically, the studies were on 8288 teeth with 14,205 root canals. Most of these surveyed studies were mostly consistent in their aims and methodologies. They used periapical radiographs to assess the length, density, and taper of the RCT [14; 15; 16; 17; 19; 21; 23; 31; 32; 33; 34; 35; 36; 37; 38]. In addition, some studies added more criteria for evaluation to explore the technical errors that happened during treatment such as ledge, broken instruments, canal transportation, and perforation [18; 23; 25; 26; 27; 28; 29; 30]. Some of the surveyed studies were more general and explored the overall quality of the RCT [15; 17; 21; 25; 31; 32], while others were more specific, such as those comparing the quality of RCT with respect to tooth type and location [1; 14; 16; 22; 33; 34; 36; 37; 40], extracting the frequency of technical errors [17; 18; 23; 27; 28; 29; 30; 41], identifying the academic grade of students who perform the treatment [24; 35; 38; 39], and exploring the complications happening as a result of errors [20]. Although the studies showed significant variation in their outcomes, the overall quality of RCT performed by undergraduates was significantly high when comparing inadequate RCT (61.4% SD \(\pm\) 20.2 and 38.6% SD \(\pm\) 20.3, respectively). While the study for [PERSON] et al. showed the highest adequate RCT among dental students, 93.8% [21], the study performed by [PERSON] et al. showed the lowest percentage of adequate RCT, 17.5% [38]. The maxillary anterior teeth, followed by premolar, showed higher RC quality compared to posterior teeth in most of the studies [15; 16; 20; 22; 25; 26; 35; 37], while fewer of them showed no significant differences between anterior and premolars or anterior and posteriors [17; 21]. The deficiency in the length of RCT was the highest error that happens during RCT as reported by some of the studies [16; 18; 21; 30; 34; 39]. On the other hand, lack of density was reported as the highest error in other studies [26; 27; 29; 31; 32; 33; 36].