Faculty Bibliography

The ability to base patient care on scientific evidence depends in part on the results of translational and applied research. The shortage of trained clinical researchers identified by several sources limits the availability of clinical research studies upon which to base evidence-based therapeutics. This premise suggests that the dental profession needs to train more clinical researchers and faculty to conduct clinical research and to teach its applications to practice. Increasing opportunities for clinical research training in a variety of settings should eventually increase the numbers of clinical researchers, raise faculty involvement in clinical research, and promote science transfer. This paper reports on the current status of clinical research in dental schools, specifies the diverse groups involved in the clinical research enterprise, and identifies underutilized opportunities and partnerships for clinical research training. Data on federal and nonfederal funding of clinical research and training programs are presented. Existing and novel mechanisms for expanding clinical research training throughout and across traditional as well as unconventional environments are explored

BACKGROUND: Oral and pharyngeal cancers cause significant morbidity and mortality, yet there has been little improvement in survival rates in the past 30 years. Because early diagnoses significantly increase survival rates, the authors summarize several approaches to educating and mobilizing the dental profession and the public about this problem. Clinicians are invited to initiate similar programs to catalyze change in their own communities. METHODS: The authors found that many approaches have been used to define the problem and initiate change. These include surveys, focus groups, development of consortia, media programs, flyers, leaflets, prescription pads, legislation and professional endorsements. RESULTS: In Maryland in 1996, only 20 percent of adults reported receiving an oral cancer examination, and most oral cancers were diagnosed at late stages by physicians, not dentists. Results of the public educational campaigns in the regions of New York/New Jersey and Maryland have not been formally evaluated, but there is a developing consensus that oral cancer diagnostic practices in the regions with active educational programs are increasing. CONCLUSIONS: Coalitions or partnerships among individuals and organizations from government, academia, private practice, industry, the general community and the media can affect awareness about oral cancer prevention and early detection on a regional basis. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: By increasing awareness of oral cancer among the dental profession and the public, earlier diagnosis of these cancers with consequent improved cure rates is likely. Providing oral cancer diagnostic services as a routine part of an oral examination also may motivate patients to visit the dentist at least once a year

Objective. To provide health care providers, patients and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data regarding the diagnosis and management of dental caries throughout life. Participants. A nonfederal, nonadvocate, 13-member panel representing the fields of dentistry, epidemiology, genetics, medicine, oral biology, oral radiology, pathology, periodontics, public health, statistics and surgery, as well as a public representative. In addition, 31 experts in these same fields presented data to the panel and to a conference audience of approximately 700. Evidence. Presentations by experts; a systematic review of the dental research literature provided by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; and an extensive bibliography of dental caries research articles, prepared by the National Library of Medicine. Scientific evidence was given precedence over clinical anecdotal experience. Consensus Process. Answering predefined questions, the panel drafted a statement based on the scientific evidence presented in open forum and the scientific literature. The draft statement was read in its entirety on the final day of the conference and circulated to the experts and the audience for comment. The panel then met in executive session to consider these comments and released a revised statement at the end of the conference. The statement was made available on the World Wide Web at 'consensus.nih.gov' immediately after the conference. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the National Institutes or the federal government

A dean looks at dental education and the practicing profession from the perspective of three years in dental school administration and sixteen in industry. A significant challenge is to balance costs and standards in the face of well-meaning calls for benefits from those who are not charged with meeting costs. One issue of central importance for education is keeping the curriculum properly positioned in a dynamically evolving profession. The knowledge and skills needed to manage the practice pharmacopeia are used as an example of this problem. It is proposed that schools adopt a future orientation. Dental education must be valued within the higher educational community just as dentistry is valued for its contributions to society at large. Any drift toward proprietary interests must be resisted. This can best be accomplished through a partnership between education and organized dentistry where the lobbying power of the ADA is used to gain the resources education needs and where education, including research and patient care aspects of its mission, are enlisted in support of the practicing community