ArticleJournal of dental education2025
How clinical exposure improves dental students' understanding of oral and maxillofacial surgery: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of dental education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How clinical exposure improves dental students' understanding of oral and maxillofacial surgery: A cross-sectional study.Journal of dental education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess dental students' understanding of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) practice areas and examine changes in referral preferences across their educational progression in Israel.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted among 349 dental students from two Israeli universities (46.5% response rate). The primary independent variable was the year of study (pre-clinical vs. clinical years). The main outcome variables included perceptions of OMFS scope and referral preferences for various procedures. Covariates included demographics and prior OMFS exposure. Chi-square tests, linear trend analysis, and mediation analysis were performed.
resultsStudents in clinical years exhibited a broader understanding of OMFS scope compared to pre-clinical years. Referral preferences to OMFS increased significantly for complex procedures like facial skeletal deformities (46.2% to 61.3%, p = 0.004) and oral cancer (66.2% to 78.9%, p = 0.008). The perception of extractions as the primary OMFS procedure increased from 63.6% in the first year to 77.6% in the sixth year (p = 0.033). Personal and family experiences with OMFS significantly mediated the relationship between year of study and referral tendencies (16.2% of total effect mediated, p < 0.001).
conclusionClinical exposure improves understanding of OMFS capabilities, leading to increased referrals for complex procedures. However, several practice areas remain underrecognized, highlighting the need for improved educational interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.