research ideas in dentistry

121+ Interesting Dental Research Topics for Undergraduates

Did you know poor oral health can be linked to heart disease? It’s true! This surprising fact underscores the importance of dental research in maintaining overall health and well-being. 

Understanding the intricate connections between oral health and systemic conditions like heart disease highlights the critical role of research in advancing our knowledge and improving patient outcomes. 

In this blog, we will delve into various dental research topics tailored specifically for undergraduates, providing insights, resources, and inspiration to explore this fascinating field further. 

Whether you’re passionate about dentistry or simply curious about the intersection of oral health and overall wellness, join us as we uncover the exciting possibilities in dental research for undergraduates.

What is Dental Research Topic?

Table of Contents

A dental research topic is a subject of study within the field of dentistry that aims to explore, investigate, and analyze various aspects related to oral health, dental care, and dental treatments. 

These topics cover a wide range of areas, including but not limited to dental diseases, preventive measures, treatment methods, oral hygiene practices, dental technology advancements, and the impact of oral health on overall well-being. 

Dental research topics provide opportunities for scholars, researchers, and students to contribute to the advancement of dental science, improve patient care, and address current challenges in oral health care.

Importance of Dental Research Topics for Undergraduates

Dental research topics are essential for undergraduates for several reasons:

Skill Development

Engaging in dental research topics helps undergraduates develop critical thinking, problem-solving, and analytical skills essential for their academic and professional growth.

Contribution to Knowledge

Undertaking research allows undergraduates to contribute to the existing body of knowledge in dentistry, advancing the field and addressing emerging challenges.

Career Preparation

Research experience enhances students’ competitiveness for dental school admissions, graduate programs, and future careers in academia, clinical practice, or research institutions.

Practical Application

Research topics offer undergraduates the opportunity to apply theoretical knowledge gained in the classroom to real-world scenarios, fostering a deeper understanding of dental concepts and techniques.

Professional Networking

Engaging in research exposes undergraduates to collaboration with peers, faculty, and professionals, facilitating valuable networking opportunities within the dental community.

Popular Dental Research Topics for Undergraduates

Dental research topics for undergraduates encompass a wide range of areas within dentistry. Here are some examples across different subfields:

Dental Diseases

• The role of genetics in the development of periodontal disease.
• Strategies for early detection and prevention of dental caries.
• Investigating the link between diabetes and periodontal disease.
• Factors influencing the prevalence of oral cancer among different demographics.
• Impact of dietary habits on the occurrence of enamel erosion.
• Effectiveness of fluoride in preventing dental decay.
• The role of saliva in maintaining oral health and preventing diseases.
• Trends in the prevalence of temporomandibular joint disorders.
• Oral manifestations of systemic diseases: A comprehensive review.
• Investigating the relationship between oral health and overall systemic health.
• The effectiveness of probiotics in preventing oral infections.
• Psychological factors influencing dental anxiety and its management.

Dental Treatments

• Comparison of different types of dental implants: Materials, techniques, and success rates.
• Advancements in minimally invasive techniques for dental restoration.
• Comparative analysis of traditional braces versus clear aligners in orthodontic treatment.
• The role of lasers in various dental procedures: Benefits and limitations.
• Innovations in endodontic treatment: From rotary instruments to regenerative techniques.
• Efficacy of different whitening agents in professional and over-the-counter dental bleaching.
• The impact of COVID-19 on dental practice: Adaptations, challenges, and future implications.
• Investigating the use of stem cells in dental tissue regeneration.
• Comparative study of different materials used in dental restorations: Strength, durability, and aesthetics.
• Exploring the potential of 3D printing technology in prosthodontics and oral surgery.
• Patient satisfaction and outcomes following different types of orthognathic surgeries.
• Long-term success rates of various techniques in root canal therapy.

Oral Health Promotion and Education

• Effectiveness of school-based oral health education programs in improving children’s oral hygiene.
• Strategies for promoting oral health in underserved communities: Challenges and solutions.
• Role of social media and technology in disseminating oral health information.
• Impact of community water fluoridation on dental caries prevention.
• The role of parents and caregivers in establishing children’s oral hygiene habits.
• Cultural influences on oral health beliefs and practices: Implications for public health campaigns.
• Effectiveness of motivational interviewing in promoting behavior change for better oral health.
• Investigating the efficacy of school-based dental sealant programs.
• Oral health literacy among different populations: Assessments and interventions.
• The role of dentists in advocating for policies promoting oral health equity.
• Strategies for improving oral health outcomes among elderly populations.
• Integrating oral health education into primary care settings: Opportunities and challenges.

Dental Materials and Biomaterials

• Biocompatibility of dental materials: Assessing safety and long-term effects.
• Development of antimicrobial dental materials to prevent biofilm formation.
• Investigating the mechanical properties of novel dental composites.
• Bioactive materials in dentistry: Applications and clinical implications.
• Biodegradable materials for temporary dental restorations.
• Nanotechnology in dentistry: Potential applications and future directions.
• Development of remineralizing agents for the management of dental caries.
• Investigating the properties and applications of dental ceramics.
• Biomimetic materials in dentistry: Mimicking natural tooth structure for improved outcomes.
• Sustainable practices in dental material manufacturing and disposal.
• Advances in adhesive systems for bonding dental restorations.
• Biomechanical properties of dental implant materials: Enhancing stability and osseointegration.

Oral Microbiology and Immunology

• Microbiome of the oral cavity: Composition, dynamics, and role in health and disease.
• Host-pathogen interactions in periodontal diseases: Insights into disease progression.
• Immunological responses to dental biofilms and their implications for treatment.
• Role of probiotics in modulating oral microbiota and preventing dental diseases.
• Viral infections in dentistry: From herpesviruses to SARS-CoV-2.
• Impact of antimicrobial resistance on dental infections and treatment outcomes.
• Microbial ecology of dental plaques in different oral environments.
• Oral manifestations of HIV/AIDS: Diagnosis, management, and implications.
• Biofilm formation on dental implant surfaces: Prevention and management strategies.
• Innate and adaptive immune responses in oral mucosal diseases.
• Virulence factors of oral pathogens and their role in disease progression.
• Immunomodulatory properties of dental materials and their impact on tissue response.

Dental Public Health

• Epidemiology of dental diseases: Trends, disparities, and risk factors.
• Health promotion strategies for improving access to dental care in rural areas.
• Oral health inequalities among different socioeconomic groups: Causes and solutions.
• Cost-effectiveness of preventive dental interventions: A systematic review.
• Integrating oral health into primary care: Models of collaborative practice.
• Tele-dentistry: Opportunities and challenges for improving access to dental care.
• Oral health surveillance systems: Monitoring trends and assessing needs.
• Assessing the effectiveness of community water fluoridation programs.
• Role of dental professionals in addressing oral health disparities.
• Impact of environmental factors on oral health outcomes: Pollution, climate change, and urbanization.
• Dental workforce issues: Distribution, shortages, and workforce diversity.
• Oral health policies and advocacy: Strategies for promoting legislative change.

Pediatric Dentistry

• Early childhood caries: Risk factors, prevention, and management strategies.
• Behavior management techniques in pediatric dentistry: Evidence-based approaches.
• Oral health outcomes of children with special healthcare needs: Challenges and interventions.
• Dental trauma in children: Prevention, diagnosis, and treatment.
• Assessment of dental fear and anxiety in pediatric patients: Tools and interventions.
• Maternal and child oral health: Prenatal factors influencing dental health outcomes.
• Dental developmental anomalies: Diagnosis, management, and long-term implications.
• Effectiveness of fluoride varnish application in preventing dental caries in children.
• Impact of nutrition and dietary habits on pediatric oral health.
• Pediatric sedation techniques in dentistry: Safety, efficacy, and guidelines.
• Orthodontic considerations in pediatric dentistry: Early intervention and treatment planning.
• Pediatric dental emergencies: Management and prevention strategies.

Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

• Outcomes of orthognathic surgery in patients with skeletal discrepancies.
• Management of impacted third molars: Indications, techniques, and complications.
• Reconstruction of maxillofacial defects following trauma or tumor resection: Surgical options and outcomes.
• Temporomandibular joint disorders: Diagnosis, management, and surgical interventions.
• Bone grafting techniques in implant dentistry: Approaches and success rates.
• Surgical management of obstructive sleep apnea: Role of maxillomandibular advancement.
• Surgical treatment options for cleft lip and palate: Multidisciplinary approaches and long-term outcomes.
• Surgical management of oral and maxillofacial infections: Antibiotic therapy, drainage, and debridement.
• Soft tissue augmentation techniques in aesthetic and functional maxillofacial surgery.
• Advancements in minimally invasive techniques for orthognathic surgery.
• Surgical management of facial trauma: Emergency interventions and long-term rehabilitation.
• Digital planning and navigation in oral and maxillofacial surgery: Enhancing precision and outcomes.

Dental Education and Training

• Effectiveness of simulation-based training in dental education: Skill acquisition and retention.
• Integration of digital technology into dental curricula: Challenges and opportunities.
• Peer-assisted learning in dental education: Impact on student performance and satisfaction.
• Interprofessional education in dentistry: Collaborative approaches to patient care.
• Continuing education requirements for dental professionals: Trends and implications.
• Assessment methods in dental education: Moving beyond traditional exams.
• The role of mentorship in shaping the career trajectories of dental students.
• Global perspectives in dental education: Cross-cultural experiences and challenges.
• Incorporating evidence-based practice into dental curricula: Strategies and outcomes.
• Tele-education in dentistry: Remote learning platforms and their effectiveness.
• Student perceptions of clinical experiences in dental education: Barriers and facilitators.
• Innovations in competency-based dental education: Assessing clinical proficiency and readiness for practice.

Dental Technology and Innovation

• Artificial intelligence in dentistry: Applications in diagnosis, treatment planning, and outcomes prediction.
• Virtual reality and augmented reality in dental education and patient care.
• Robotics in dentistry: Automation of procedures and precision in surgical interventions.
• Wearable technology for monitoring oral health behaviors and conditions.
• 3D printing in dentistry: Customization of dental implants, prostheses, and surgical guides.
• Digital smile design: Utilizing technology for aesthetic treatment planning and communication.
• Smart materials in dentistry: Self-healing, self-cleaning, and bioactive properties.
• Teledentistry platforms for remote consultations, monitoring, and patient education.
• Biomimetic approaches in dental materials design: Mimicking natural tooth structure and function.
• Nanomaterials in oral healthcare products: Enhanced delivery systems and therapeutic applications.
• Bioprinting of dental tissues and organs: Advancements in regenerative dentistry.
• Energy-based devices in dentistry: Laser therapy, photobiomodulation, and electrosurgery applications.
• Development of a Smart Toothbrush with Artificial Intelligence Integration.

These topics offer a comprehensive overview of the diverse areas within the field of dental research and provide undergraduates with a plethora of options for exploring their interests and making meaningful contributions to the discipline.

Current Trends in Dental Research

Several trends were prevalent in dental research. While there may have been further developments since then, here are some prominent trends at that time:

Biomimetic Dentistry

Mimicking natural tooth structure and function using advanced materials and techniques.

Tele-dentistry

Utilizing technology for remote consultations, monitoring, and patient education, especially amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.

Regenerative Dentistry

Developing therapies to regenerate dental tissues and promote natural healing processes.

Personalized Dentistry

Tailoring treatment plans based on individual patient characteristics, genetics, and preferences.

Minimally Invasive Dentistry

Emphasizing conservative approaches to preserve tooth structure and improve patient comfort.

Digital Dentistry

Integration of digital technology for diagnostics, treatment planning, and fabrication of dental restorations.

Nanotechnology

Utilizing nanomaterials for improved dental materials, drug delivery systems, and diagnostic tools.

Challenges in Dental Research Topics

Dental research, like any scientific field, faces its share of challenges. These challenges can span various aspects of the research process, from funding and resources to methodological complexities and ethical considerations. Here are some common challenges in dental research:

Funding Constraints

Limited financial resources hinder the initiation and continuation of dental research projects.

Access to Resources

Inadequate access to specialized equipment, materials, and facilities poses a barrier to conducting comprehensive research.

Recruitment of Participants

Difficulty in recruiting diverse and representative study populations affects the generalizability of research findings.

Ethical Considerations

Navigating ethical complexities, such as informed consent and privacy concerns, adds challenges to dental research.

Interdisciplinary Collaboration

Facilitating collaboration between dental professionals, researchers, and other disciplines is essential but often challenging.

Translation of Research into Practice

Bridging the gap between research findings and clinical implementation remains a significant challenge in dental research.

The exploration of dental research topics holds immense promise for advancing oral health care and addressing multifaceted challenges within the field. 

From unraveling the mysteries of oral diseases to pioneering innovative treatments and technologies, dental research serves as the cornerstone of progress and improvement in patient outcomes. 

Despite facing various challenges such as funding constraints and ethical considerations, the pursuit of dental research remains crucial for enhancing preventive measures, refining treatment modalities, and promoting overall well-being.

By fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, embracing emerging trends, and prioritizing the translation of research findings into practice, the dental community can continue to drive impactful discoveries and advancements for the benefit of individuals worldwide.

1. How can I stay updated on the latest dental research?

Staying updated on the latest dental research can be as simple as subscribing to reputable dental journals, attending conferences, and following dental research institutions and experts on social media platforms.

2. What are some examples of emerging dental research topics?

Emerging dental research topics include genetics and oral health, biomaterials and tissue engineering, and microbiome studies, among others.

3. Why is dental research important for patients?

Dental research drives innovation in oral healthcare, leading to improved treatment outcomes, personalized care, and enhanced preventive strategies for patients.

Related Posts

Science Fair Project Ideas For 6th Graders

When it comes to Science Fair Project Ideas For 6th Graders, the possibilities are endless! These projects not only help students develop essential skills, such…

Java Project Ideas for Beginners

Java is one of the most popular programming languages. It is used for many applications, from laptops to data centers, gaming consoles, scientific supercomputers, and…

Skip to content

​Support the College of Dental Medicine

Community outreach.

Learn more about the College of Dental Medicine's community outreach programs. 

​Postdoctoral and Residency Programs

​dds program.

Half of our graduates go directly into specialty training upon completion of the DDS degree.

​Research Areas

Patient care, columbiadoctors dentistry, become a student.

Learn more about the admissions process and how you can apply.

​​Student Research Projects

• Member Login

Oral Health Topics

The Oral Health Topics section on ADA.org is intended to provide dentists with clinically relevant, evidence-based science behind the issues that may affect their patients and their practice. Refer to the Oral Health Topics for current scientific reviews of subjects that relate to oral health, from amalgam separators and antibiotic prophylaxis to xerostomia and X-rays.

Featured oral health topics

Learn which oral analgesics  are used for the management of acute dental pain.

Understand Occupational Safety and Health Administration  (OSHA) safety standards.

Learn about special considerations for pregnant patients and pregnant dental personnel .

Efficacy information about whitening  treatments for extrinsic and intrinsic staining.

• Open access
• Published: 23 July 2022

The picture of undergraduate dental basic research education: a scoping review

• Haiwen Liu 1   na1 ,
• Zhuohong Gong 1   na1 ,
• Chen Ye 1 ,
• Xuejing Gan 1 ,
• Shijie Chen 1 ,
• Yun Hong 1 ,
• Junqing Xu 1 ,
• Zhengmei Lin 1 &
• Zetao Chen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8344-2602 1  

BMC Medical Education volume  22 , Article number:  569 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

2533 Accesses

5 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Undergraduate dental basic research education (UDBRE) is broadly regarded as an important approach for cultivating scientific research talent. This scoping review aims to summarize the current status of UDBRE in terms of educational goals, teaching program and content, assessment system, training outcomes, barriers, and reflections.

The authors performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) to identify peer-reviewed articles written in English from their inception to January 29, 2021. Articles were reviewed and screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Related data from the included publications were then collected and summarized.

The authors searched 646 publications and selected 16 articles to include in the study. The education goals included cultivating five major dental basic research capabilities ( n =10, 62.5%) and developing interest in basic research ( n =2, 12.5%). As for the teaching program, the mentor-guided student research project was the most popular ( n =11, 68.8%), followed by didactic courses ( n =5, 31.3%), experimental skills training ( n =1, 6.3%), and the combination of the above forms ( n =3, 18.8%). However, the assessment system and training outcome diverged. Existing evidence showed that UDBRE reached satisfying education outcomes. Barriers included excessive curriculum burden ( n =2, 12.5%), tutor shortage ( n =3, 18.8%), lack of financial support ( n =5, 31.3%), and inadequate research skills and knowledge ( n =5, 31.3%).

Conclusions

Although efforts were made, the variation between studies revealed the immature status of UDBRE. A practical UDBRE education system paradigm was put forward. Meanwhile, more research is required to optimize a robust UDBRE system with clear education goals, well-designed teaching forms, and convincing assessment systems.

Peer Review reports

According to the director of the US Office of Scientific Development and Research, “basic research” means advancing scientific knowledge and understanding of a topic or certain natural phenomenon, primarily in natural science [ 1 ]. Basic research is theoretical and focuses on general principles and testing theories and the importance of basic research in dentistry development is beyond question. Breakthroughs in dental basic research have profoundly advanced the diagnosis and treatment of dentistry by generating new ideas, principles, and theories and advancing fundamental knowledge of dentistry [ 1 , 2 ]. For example, the formulation of the three primary factors theory (bacteria-diet-host) established the theoretical basis of prevention strategies such as plaque control and pit and fissure sealing [ 3 ]. The establishment of mechanobiology-based bone remodelling theories underpins the biologic basis of contemporary orthodontic therapy [ 4 ]. In short, dental basic research contributes substantially to the advancement of dentistry.

However, the current dental scientist talent pool is facing a shortage, and the competitiveness of dental talent is decreasing [ 5 , 6 ]. The 2020 American Dental Education Association (ADEA) survey of dental school seniors showed that 85% of dental graduates chose private practice, rather than pursuing research careers [ 7 ]. Moreover, from 1999 to 2012, trends in the numbers of grant applications and awards to dentist-scientists point to an overall decline. The average age of first-time funded dentists was 52.7 years for females and 54.6 years for males [ 8 ]. Most dental practitioners are equipped with clinical skills, yet have relatively poor research abilities.

This trend leads to the reflection on the effectiveness of current dental education in cultivating dental research talent. As early as 1926, the Gies Report recommended that dental education should encourage and provide dental students with research opportunities within the optional dental curriculum [ 9 ]. “Undergraduate Dental Basic Research Education (UDBRE)”, concerning the topic of “basic research”, serves as an integral part and complement of undergraduate dental education [ 10 , 11 ]. It includes not only laboratory-related training (RCR, western blot, etc.) but also the primary introduction of commonalities of research, including knowing what is a problem, how to raise a scientific problem, etc. [ 12 ]. UDBRE enhances the access, acceptance, and applicability of basic science for dental undergraduates [ 13 ] in various forms, including but not limited to didactic lectures [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ], laboratory-based experimental courses [ 16 ], student research programs [ 13 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ], etc.

UDBRE is broadly regarded as an important approach in training innovative dental researchers [ 23 ]. For individuals, UDBRE equips undergraduates with overall “basic research” capacities [ 10 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 22 , 23 ], serving as fundamental tools to solve basic science problems and further achieve academic breakthroughs. In addition, UDBRE stimulates active learning and critical thinking [ 10 ] and sparks scientific interest [ 15 , 23 ], leading dental students to reflect and discover basic science problem in daily clinical practice, and therefore, contribute to dentistry advancement. Over time, trained students, equipped with both clinical skills and adept “basic research” capacities, boost the scientist-dentist talent reserves and show a higher willingness to stay in school to continue an academic career as well as to teaching, which leads to the expansion of college staff and therefore relieves the current status of brain drain [ 13 ]. Supported by the government in policy and finance [ 24 ], UDBRE has become a new hot spot in dental education.

Dental clinical education has formed a mature training system, starting with didactic courses, then probation, internship, general training, and finally professional training to achieve educational goals at different stages [ 25 , 26 ]. In contrast, UDBRE is still at a primary and immature stage. Most dental schools have not started student research programs or provide inadequate research programs due to various limitations [ 15 ]. The existing UDBRE education goals are vague, which may misdirect the proper setting of specific curricula. Thus, the current curriculum formats are diverse, and an optimized UDBREE system according to students’ step-by-step learning process has not yet been formed [ 10 , 11 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 27 ]. Furthermore, the assessment methods vary. It is not yet clear which indicators can truly reflect the genuine effects of UDBRE, and the lack of an established optimized assessment system has also caused difficulties in curriculum design [ 13 , 18 , 19 , 23 ]. It is unclear how the UDBRE is performed in different regions, including the content, teaching format and assessment methods. The training outcomes and the challenges in the implementation are also confusing. In addition, the immature development stage of UDBRE and the small number of related studies call for larger scale collection of information.

For these reasons, a scoping review was performed to systematically collecting information in the area, and identifying any existing gaps in knowledge to conclude the current picture of the UDBRE programs in terms of goals, content and teaching format, assessment, outcomes, barriers, and challenges. It is essential to establish an advanced education model of UDBRE and analyse it from a scientific perspective.

Materials and methods

This scoping review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA Guidelines [ 28 ]. Three trained researchers conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Web of Science, and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) databases. “Dental education”, “Undergraduate”, “Basic research”, and their synonyms were used as keywords (Table  1 ).

Eligibility criteria

The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) all studies related to “Dental education”, “Undergraduate” and “Basic research” no matter curriculum forms, (2) English-language articles, and (3) articles published from their inception to January 29, 2021.

The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) studies not focusing on one of “dental education”, “undergraduate” or “basic research”, (2) studies related to “dental hygiene” or “dental technology” were also excluded because these subjects were different from “dentistry” in curriculum, and (3) non-English written articles.

Selection of sources of evidence

Three reviewers searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) databases, removed duplicate documents, and screened the articles independently according to the titles and abstracts. Then, each of the three reviewers screened the full texts of two-thirds of the retained articles, which means that each article was reviewed twice. Throughout the whole process, reviewers held meetings to address discrepancies and reach an agreement on the final included articles. The process of screening literature is summarized in a flow diagram (Fig.  1 ).

PRISMA flow diagram. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flow diagram shows the detailed process of information retrieval and literature screening

Data charting process and synthesis of results

The authors extracted information from the included articles, includes basic information, education goals, teaching programs, assessment methods and indicators, educational outcomes, barriers, and main conclusions.

Results and discussion

In total, 646 articles were obtained initially and 16 articles were included according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria (Fig. 1 ). The included articles have been gradually published since 2008. The duration of the education project in each article varied, and lasted for a maximum of 25 years. The basic information of the included articles is listed in Table  2 .

Specific targets of UDBRE have been put forward around the ultimate goal: “cultivating dental research talent with basic research capabilities and strong scientific interest” [ 10 , 11 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 27 ] (Table 2 ). According to the process of scientific research, the proposed target competencies are subdivided into five aspects: (1) Basic research question discovery ability. Students should put forward innovative scientific questions from the difficulties of dental clinical practice [ 19 , 21 , 23 ]. Creativity is also an important dimension [ 19 ]. (2) Literature retrieval ability. Undergraduates shall be capable of conducting literature retrieval, reviewing the progress of the research question, critical thinking on previous research, and proposing a hypothesis [ 17 , 19 , 21 ]. (3) Research design capability. This goal expects students to retrieve literature, think critically, apply theoretical knowledge [ 11 ], formulate clear aims [ 19 ], design protocols [ 23 ], integrate creative ideas, consider ethical principles [ 19 ], and conduct preliminary experiments [ 23 ]. Many student research programs also aim to cultivate the ability to obtain financial support (research funds, scholarships, etc.) by writing applications or oral presentations on their research projects [ 11 , 23 ]. (4) Experimental techniques. The student should master basic laboratory techniques, obtain valid data and analyse experimental data [ 16 , 23 ]. (5) Scientific report writing ability. It comprises data analysis [ 23 ], graph plotting, critical thinking, and scientific report writing (thesis, article, etc.) [ 11 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 27 ]. Academic communication is a further goal. After the complete training of UDBRE, students are expected to deepen their understanding of scientific knowledge and develop professional theory and practice [ 19 ], as well as to establish their competencies in problem-solving and teamwork [ 10 ]. In addition to cultivating capabilities, promoting scientific interest is also an important goal of UDBRE, which is ignored by many guidelines [ 23 , 27 ].

Specific goals of UDBRE programs are proposed but divergence exists within studies. The cultivation of the above five major abilities and the promotion of scientific interest serve as ideal objectives of UDBRE. Clarifying the education target helps dental schools design specific education methods to fulfil the goals.

Content and teaching format

The reported content and teaching format of UDBRE are diverse but have something in common. The authors identified four major forms (Table 2 ): (1) theoretical courses or lectures [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]; (2) experimental skills training [ 16 , 23 ]; (3) mentor-guided student research projects [ 10 , 11 , 13 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 27 ]; and (4) combination of above forms [ 15 , 16 , 18 ].

Dental basic research theoretical courses

A Brazilian dentistry school reported adding theoretical lessons before the experimental course. Compared with those who attended a single laboratory class, participants had more discussion and showed a deeper understanding of important science topics in the final reports [ 16 ]. Similar lessons have been reported [ 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 ]. The dental basic research theoretical courses before the experimental lessons are helpful to contextualize basic research in dental courses, learn scientific knowledge and establish scientific thinking.

The teaching content of each study had different focuses, covering scientific research methods [ 14 , 18 ], literature retrieval [ 17 ], laboratory safety [ 16 ], training of basic research thinking [ 14 ], data analysis, and paper writing [ 17 ]. Regrettably, no document recorded the textbooks or reference materials used. The specific teaching methods also had their own merits. Some were traditional didactic curricula [ 18 ], and others adopted novel methods, such as project-based learning [ 16 ] and problem-based learning [ 10 ].

Although it is important in systematic research knowledge enlightenment, theoretical courses in UDBRE have been reported in relatively few studies [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ] (Table 2 , n  = 5). The teaching content and method of didactic courses were unclear and more efforts are needed to improve feasibility. The basic research process, academic norms, and primary skills of dental basic research should also be included in the teaching content.

Experimental skills training in UDBRE

Experimental skills training (Table 2 , n  = 6) is usually integrated into UDBRE, together with other programs [ 11 , 13 , 16 , 18 , 20 , 23 ], rather than an isolated educational program. The most common situation is that undergraduates learn the experiment involved in their projects under mentorship [ 23 ]. Another situation is to combine experimental and theoretical courses [ 16 ]. Although the current method is feasible, students may lack systematic training, and acquire experimental skills occasionally and irregularly. Such scattered and nonstandard learning should be transformed into a systematic and well-designed course.

Mentor-guided student research project

The mentor-guided student research project is the most common among the included articles [ 10 , 11 , 13 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 27 ] (Table 2 , n  = 11), in which dental students experience the research process under mentorship. It usually begins with dental scientific questions put forward by undergraduates, and then they design their own scientific research projects after preparation (literature research, protocol design, etc.). Subsequently, they apply for research funds, scholarships, or student research projects. If accepted, students need to complete experiments in the laboratory, analyse data, express critical reflections, write an article or a report and finally complete the student research project under the guidance of the tutors [ 11 , 13 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 22 , 23 ].

Most research topics focus on dentistry. For topics in the field of medicine, human sciences, or other professionals, students needed to discuss the contribution of their research findings to dental practice [ 19 , 23 ], which may promote interdisciplinary research. In terms of specific disciplines, in clinical departments, orthodontics, oral surgery, periodontology, and restorative dentistry have been the most popular fields. While the most attractive basic science departments have been microbiology, biochemistry, and pathology [ 11 ].

Although interdisciplinary mentorship is practicable, the research topic should be within the field of dentistry due to its unique characteristics. However, many schools failed to popularize student research projects due to insufficient dental supervisors. In this situation, interdisciplinary research is acceptable because scientific research has commonalities.

As the results disclose, UDBRE has not yet been popularized worldwide but dental schools have become aware of the significance of UDBRE. Some schools have begun to make some efforts and have achieved preliminary results. Various forms of UDBRE have been established, such as theoretical courses, experimental skills training, and mentor-guided student research projects.

Compared with the mature clinical training model, dental basic research education has not been organized. There have not been many integrated projects of the above forms [ 15 , 16 , 18 ]. Most of them are short-term projects of up to two years [ 18 , 23 ]. Long-term training projects have not yet appeared. Given all this, the next goal of UDBRE is to form a scientific and gradual education system.

There are differences between education forms. Which are better methods also remains unknown. How to organically integrate different education forms to maximize the effectiveness of education requires further study. Moreover, the different emphasis on teaching methods may be attributed to differences in cultures, policies, and school conditions [ 19 ].

Assessment methods

The assessment methods are related to the education forms (Table 2 ). For theoretical courses, educators employed the following: (1) test on concepts [ 16 , 17 ] – a Brazilian dental school set an exam about basic concepts of dental biomaterial at the end of classes [ 16 ]; (2) article presentation [ 16 ] – students need to search articles on the assigned topic and present the articles as well as their perception of search methodologies, result translation, and critical reading skills in a seminar [ 16 ]; and (3) questionnaire [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. The assessment methods of experimental skills training comprised the following: (1) exam [ 16 ]; (2) experimental report [ 16 ]; and (3) questionnaire [ 16 ]. Most research projects arranged the assessment at the end of the project, including: (1) submission of a thesis [ 13 , 19 , 22 ], which is the most popular and basic form of assessment. Details of the project report were well specified in several Swedish dental schools, such as page numbers, structure, layout, references, etc. [ 19 ]; (2) oral presentations or meetings [ 11 , 13 , 18 ] – the verbal presentation at the University of Manitoba was styled after an MSc thesis defence, where students summarized their findings and several professors provided oral feedback [ 13 ]. The Student Research Club (SRC) of Istanbul University held annual meetings where students gave 10- to 15-min speeches on their research. Additionally, a booklet containing all the project abstracts was distributed to participants, which promoted academic exchanges [ 11 ]; (3) competitions [ 18 , 27 ] – in South Africa [ 18 ], undergraduates were awarded in Colgate Undergraduate Competition based on the project quality and their insights shown in the questioning part; (4) questionnaire [ 11 , 15 , 18 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]; and (5) combination of the above methods [ 13 , 18 , 22 , 23 ].

Nevertheless, considering the assessment time point, the majority of studies chose summative assessments [ 11 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 27 , 29 ], while the others chose formative assessments [ 16 , 18 ]. Among all the included studies, only one study mentioned midterm assessment [ 23 ]. Most projects mainly relied on mentors’ supervision during implementation, which may account for the abortion of some student research projects. Moreover, ambiguous assessment indicators of midterm supervision may not truly reflect the training outcome or the achievement of educational goals.

Assessment indicators

Targeting the educational goals, specific indicators were adopted according to assessment methods and the feasibility of indicator collection (Table 2 ): (1) The problem discovery ability can be assessed by self-assessment [ 11 , 14 , 22 , 23 ] or evaluated along with other research abilities. For example, the number of funded projects can reflect both the ability of problem discovery and project design [ 11 , 23 ]. (2) The literature retrieval ability can be evaluated through self-assessment [ 11 , 17 , 21 ]. (3) The research design capability can be depicted by the number of applied research funds [ 11 , 23 ] and self-assessment [ 11 ]. (4) The ability of experimental operation can be assessed through experiment course scores [ 16 , 23 ], experimental reports [ 16 ], and self-assessment [ 11 , 14 , 23 ]. (5) The scientific report writing ability can be evaluated by indicators, such as the number of published papers [ 23 ], research competition awards [ 27 ], and self-assessment [ 11 , 14 ]. (6) Students’ interest in scientific research can be estimated through (a) instant feedback, such as the number of participants [ 13 ] and attendance rate [ 23 ]. (b) long-term influence, including future career choices and talent retention [ 11 , 13 , 18 , 23 , 29 ].

The assessment system varies across studies. Regretfully, imperfection of the current assessment is observed as they are incomprehensive and immethodical. The lack of assessment of overall education goals is manifested as the ignorance of one or several aspects of education goals. In addition, the neglect of mid-term assessment is common in the included studies. This leads to difficulties in evaluating the overall performance and comparing the effectiveness between studies and programs. Hence, a systemic and comprehensive assessment system based on education goals should be established to monitor the outcome of UDBRE for timely adjustment and long-term tracking.

Existing reports uncover the education achievements of UDBRE, including target research ability development and scientific interest promotion (Table  3 ).

Development of target research abilities

(1) The problem discovery ability: Nigerian educators discovered that 45.2% of undergraduates chose the research topic by themselves [ 22 ]. (2) The literature retrieval ability: SRC participants strongly agreed that the program developed their experience of searching archives [ 11 ]. Likewise, Nieminen reported that almost 80% of undergraduates perceived to have good or passable literature retrieval skills after compulsory information retrieval lessons [ 17 ]. (3) The research design capability: Yu’s study revealed that the number of funded research projects has increased in the past 11 years, from 1 ~ 2 projects per year (2007–2011) to 7 projects per year (2017) [ 23 ]. Similarly, Guven’s study showed growing trend of funds and the participants agreed that they developed better research planning and independent inquiry skills during the research [ 11 ]. (4) The ability of experimental operation: A Brazilian study showed that compared with students who only participated in theoretical courses, the average course scores of PBL participants were slightly higher (7.8 ± 1.2 and 7.2 ± 1.6, respectively). Significantly more content of methodology and scientific literature support was detected in the experimental report of PBL participants [ 16 ]. In Yu’s and Guven’s study, the students believed that UDBRE helped to obtain experimental techniques [ 11 , 23 ]. (5) The scientific report writing ability: A study showed that UDBRE participants published significantly more articles (1.62 ± 1.41) than nonparticipants (1.31 ± 0.75) during the postgraduate period [ 23 ]. UDBRE participants from the University of Manitoba won first place in a scientific competition (Canadian Association for Dental Research) for their outstanding scientific work [ 27 ]. Analogously, SRC participants agreed that the program strengthened their analytical skills as well as their ability to present research results and therefore formed a better basis for postgraduate studies [ 11 ]. However, only 46.7% of surveyed Pakistani medical and dental undergraduates claimed to know how to write articles. Few students (17.7%) acquired knowledge of the procedure of publication of articles, indicating that these studies scarcely emphasized the cultivation of thesis writing [ 14 ].

Students’ interest in scientific research

UDBRE has both short-term and long-lasting effects on students’ interest in scientific research (Table 3 ). (1) Instant feedback: UDBRE participants increased from one (1980) to 11 (2005) [ 13 ] in Scott’s study. Yu’s study found that the attendance rate of UDBRE increased from 36.84 to 90% and that students showed high satisfaction (VAS score = 72.36 ± 20.37) [ 23 ]. A South African study found that 92% of students realized the importance of basic research and 34% were willing to participate in research activities again [ 18 ]. The satisfaction rate of different Swedish dental schools varied from 26 to 50% [ 19 ]. Three studies reported that students with research experience possessed a mediocre attitude towards research and 75% did not gain confidence in research [ 21 , 22 , 29 ]. (2) Long-term influence: SRC members showed great willingness to pursue a Ph.D. degree. Furthermore,74 SRC members continued studying at Istanbul University from 2005 to 2009 and 31% of present teaching assistants were former SRC members [ 11 ]. Similarly, at the University of Manitoba, 31.5% of UDBRE graduates continued pursuing higher academic degrees and 17% of them obtained postgraduate programs [ 13 ]. However, Grossman found that in three out of four surveyed schools, over half of the students were unwilling to do research in the future [ 18 ].

Existing evidence (Table 3 ) shows that the UDBRE has reached certain education outcomes. UDBRE participants yielded satisfying advancements in targeted scientific research abilities. Undergraduates expressed a high degree of satisfaction with UDBRE and interest in scientific research and demonstrated more willingness to continue their postgraduate studies and academic careers. Few students conveyed negative attitudes [ 15 , 18 ], who may encounter difficulties (conflict with clinical learning, failure in the experiment, lack of guidance, etc.). This arouses educators’ concern about barriers to UDBRE and reminds educators to offer guidance and assistance to improve the UDBRE program timely.

For current UDBRE deficiency, apart from subjective design reasons, objective obstacles cannot be neglected (Table 2 ), including excessive curriculum burden [ 10 , 14 , 29 ], shortage of academic faculty, and mentorship [ 6 , 15 , 18 , 23 , 29 ], insufficient financial support [ 10 , 14 , 18 , 21 , 23 ], and deficiency in research methodology and background knowledge [ 15 , 17 , 21 , 23 , 29 ]. Reflections and possible solutions are provided in some publications [ 10 , 14 , 15 , 18 , 23 ].

Excessive curriculum burden?

UDBRE may aggravate the heavy burden of dental clinical courses. In Pakistan, 91.9% of medical and dental undergraduates complained about the heavy curriculum load [ 14 ]. Twenty-two percent of students in South Africa [ 18 ] and 12% in China [ 23 ] admitted the conflict of study time and research time. Some studies observed a lack of interest and initiative towards scientific research due to the heavy load of time-and-energy-consuming dental clinical curricula [ 10 , 29 ]. A survey demonstrated that only 34% of interviewees were sure to attend research even if it was voluntary [ 18 ].

In fact, follow-up studies on grade point average (GPA) [ 11 , 13 , 23 ] and scholarship [ 13 , 23 ] showed that UDBRE had no negative impact, but rather a positive effect on the dental clinical study (Table 3 ). In Canada, UDBRE participants showed similar baseline GPAs as nonparticipants, while they gained significantly higher total GPAs upon graduation (3.42 ± 0.41 and 3.14 ± 0.44, respectively) [ 13 ]. Similar GPA comparison outcomes were observed by Guven (3.05 ± 0.44 and 2.55 ± 0.42, respectively, P  < .001) [ 11 ] and Yu (3.41 ± 0.02 and 3.21 ± 0.04, respectively, P  < .001) [ 23 ]. Moreover, 20% of outstanding graduates at Manitoba University have participated in UDBRE [ 13 ]. Likewise, Yu observed that UDBRE participants won significantly more Honor Rolls awards per student (0.53 ± 0.07) than nonparticipants (0.30 ± 0.06) [ 23 ].

These results indicate that students are capable of coping with such pressure, rather than it adversely affecting their study (Table 3 ). Therefore, educators should offer psychological guidance to release pressure, and optimize curriculum design to control time occupation. This provides an opportunity for universities to integrate the UDBRE into the undergraduate curriculum, sort out and optimize all existing undergraduate courses, integrate repeated lessons, and condense into a more reasonable undergraduate curriculum system. Flexibly setting primary and intermediate educational goals, adopting adjustable teaching methods by integrating core curriculum and extra curriculum, and the early exposure to UDBRE serve as alternatives to avoid time conflict.

Tutors shortage and insufficient guidance?

The lack of academic faculty is mostly mentioned in the UDBRE literature [ 6 , 18 , 29 ]. From 2004 to 2005, there were 250 unfilled faculty positions in dental schools in the USA [ 30 ]. The same applies to South Africa [ 18 ] and the United Kingdom [ 6 ].

Moreover, quite a few studies reflect the insufficient guidance of faculty [ 15 , 18 , 23 ]. Grossman [ 18 ] found that nearly one fifth of students felt inadequate supervisory assistance. These educational skills were lacking at the beginning of most junior assistant professors’ careers [ 23 ]. This could be a serious problem. Supervisors lacking mentorship had a negative impact on students’ research experience [ 31 ].

Several measures solve the shortage, including: (1) to increase the salary of research faculty; (2) to expand the faculty troop by recruiting young doctors, postdoctoral fellows, and even academic tutors from other disciplines; (3) to integrate student projects into teachers’ research fields, which promotes more detailed and professional guidance from tutors and releases tutors’ understaffed situations with undergraduates’ assistance; and (4) to provide mentor training courses to junior tutors.

Lack of financial support?

Both students and faculty acknowledged that funds and financial support were essential for student research projects [ 23 ]. However, 86.9% and 92.6% of medical and dental students, respectively, faced fund shortages in Pakistan [ 14 ]. The government, universities, and dental schools are indispensable in providing financial support and an academic environment to enable the sustainable operation of the UDBRE [ 23 ].

Inadequate basic research skills and background knowledge?

A shortage of basic research skills and background knowledge led to difficulty in the initiation and a decrease in initiative [ 15 , 29 ]. Undergraduates, especially freshmen, spend more time absorbing background knowledge and methodology of scientific research [ 15 ]. Even fourth-year dental students exhibited insufficient research knowledge and unsatisfactory information retrieval ability [ 17 ].

Moreover, most students are only familiar with the background knowledge of a certain topic notwithstanding multidisciplinary research is a new trend in basic research. Yu recorded an increasing proportion of multidisciplinary projects from 0 (2007) to a maximum of 55.56% (2015). In addition, both dental faculty and students were aware that cross-departmental training was essential to completing the research project, with 8.22% of interviewees calling on facilitating multidisciplinary cooperation [ 23 ].

Thus, undergraduates should attend theoretical and experimental courses to hone basic research skills before undertaking a research project. Nevertheless, teaching comes with difficulties while the integration of basic research experimental training into the curriculum system may serve as a solution. For example, microbial-related experiment training can be integrated into dental microbiology courses. Supplementary education can also be used to provide further study opportunities.

In response to the lack of background knowledge and the trend of multidisciplinary research, the authors proposed a new UDBRE component--rotation in different research departments, where students can practice basic research skills and gain background knowledge of different research fields.

There are still various difficulties in the implementation of UDBRE, as well as corresponding solutions (Table 2 ). It is necessary to optimize the UDBRE system, so that students can smoothly start research projects rather than encountering difficulties and losing interest. Measures are also needed to enhance teachers’ responsibility and interest.

Implications for undergraduate dental basic research education

Although UDBRE has not yet been popularized worldwide, the establishment of UDBRE has been explored by some countries, and UDBRE programs have recently increased. Through systematically reviewing these useful explorations and experiences, some enlightening implications were obtained.

Implications for dental education goals . There is an urgent need for compound talent with both clinical skills and basic research capacity. Even for clinical dentists, critical thinking and evidence-based medical thinking are also beneficial. The education of common research essence in UDBRE, such as research question discovery, literature retrieval, research design, and report writing, can favour dentists in their future clinical careers. Equipping students with primary but overall scientific research abilities so that students can develop critical thinking and form evidence-based minds is of great educational significance. Specific goals of UDBRE programs are proposed, but divergence exists within studies (Table 2 ). These specific goals can be summarized as “cultivating dental research talent with basic research capabilities and strong scientific interests”. Therefore, promoting scientific interest and cultivating five major research abilities, including basic research question discovery, literature retrieval, research design, experimental operation, and scientific report writing may serve as ideal objectives of UDBRE. Clarifying the education target may help dental schools design specific education methods to fulfil the goals. Setting primary and intermediate goals can help reduce students’ workload and increase the feasibility of UDBRE.

Implications for the dental course system . As a more skill-based course, there may be some concerns about dental basic research education in increasing the course burden and clinical study outcome. From the review outcomes and experience in carrying this course, it seems that UDBRE had no negative impact, but rather a positive effect on dental clinical study; students tend to have higher clinical-related course GPAs. This further confirms the necessity and feasibility of vertically integrating this system. Dental basic research education is systematic work, and the UDBRE system can be early, continuous, and long-term and be carried out simultaneously with clinical education in a vertically integrated way [ 32 ]. Mimicking the mature dental clinical training system, this study attempts to arrange and classify the training contents of UDBRE into three stages (Figs.  2 and 3 ): (1) Didactic course and experimental training period. In the first stage, students are expected to acquire the necessary basic research theory and skills, which may overcome the barrier of inadequate basic research skills and help students start the research practice (Fig.  3 ). Tables  4 and 5 lists examples of optimized and integrated curriculum settings. (2) Probationary period. Students with cumulative dental research knowledge and skills are introduced to different research departments as clinical rotations. The early direct exposure to different dental basic research departments enables reinforcement of impressions on how dental basic research is conducted and deepening of the knowledge of different disciplines. (3) Internship period. During this period, students shift from being passive audiences to active participants by undergoing a mentor-guided research project in a similar manner as the clinical internship. At the end of this preparatory stage, students are encouraged to finish an undergraduate research thesis. It should be noted that this teaching system is only one example (which has been carried out in our school), and different dental schools can adjust to the proper UDBRE system for them.

The three-stage UDBRE system mimicking the dental clinical training system. Since the education model of UDBRE is still under exploration and the dental clinical training system is relatively mature, we have attempted to arrange and classify the training contents of UDBRE into three stages mimicking the current clinical training system, including didactic course, probation, and internship

Detailed information of an example of UDBRE system which consisted of three stages. The prospective education goals, course forms, and assessment system of the undergraduate dental basic research education (UDBRE) program are listed in detail along the timeline

Implications for the assessment system . Concerning the common neglect of mid-term assessment and focus on certain research abilities, we propose that assessments should be targeted at overall educational goals and should be conducted not only at the end of each stage but throughout the whole period so as to adjust and formulate individualized training plans according to feedback. We have attempted to arrange and classify the assessment system of UDBRE, which can be found in Fig. 3 .

Future prospects

These implications enlighten a scientific, gradual, and long-term UDBRE system (Fig. 3 ). Undergraduates can be exposed early to dental basic science to maximize research experience and the opportunity to conduct publishable research. In support of further advancement, it is encouraged that universities report comprehensively in a structured way on their UDBRE programs to allow comparison and reproduction. With the development of the UDBRE system, it is of interest in the future to set up a new degree program that focuses on dental basic research for students with dental clinical medical backgrounds.

Availability of data and materials

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Abbreviations

Undergraduate Dental Basic Research Education

Education Resources Information Center

Grade point average

Visual analogue scale

Bush V. Science: The Endless Frontier A Report to the President by Vannevar Bush, Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development. United States Government Printing Office. https://www.nsf.gov/about/history/nsf50/vbush1945_content.jsp . Published 1945. Accessed 13 Nov 2009.

Slavkin HC. The impact of research on the future of dental education: how research and innovation shape dental education and the dental profession. J Dent Educ. 2017;81(9):eS108–27. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.970998 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Selwitz RH, Ismail AI, Pitts NB. Dental caries. Lancet. 2007;369(9555):51–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60031-2 .

Sandy JR, Farndale RW, Meikle MC. Recent advances in understanding mechanically induced bone remodeling and their relevance to orthodontic theory and practice. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1993;103(3):212–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(93)70002-6 .

Iacopino AM, Lynch DP, Taft T. Preserving the pipeline: a model dental curriculum for research non-intensive institutions. J Dent Educ. 2004;68(1):44–9.

Rushton VE, Horner K. Academic dentistry. J Dent. 2008;36(7):472–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2008.04.003 .

Istrate EC, Slapar FJ, Mallarapu M, Stewart DCL, West KP. Dentists of tomorrow 2020: an analysis of the results of the 2020 ADEA survey of U.S. dental school seniors. J Dent Educ. 2021;85(3):427–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.12568 .

D'Souza RN, Colombo JS, Embree MC, Myers JM, DeRouen TA. Our essential and endangered dentist-scientist workforce. JDR Clin Trans Res. 2017;2(1):10–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/2380084416673346 .

Gies WJ. Dental education in the United States and Canada. A report to the Carnegie Foundation for the advancement of teaching. J Am Coll Dent 2012. 1926;79(2):32–49.

Google Scholar  

Divaris K, Barlow PJ, Chendea SA, Cheong WS, Dounis A, Dragan IF, et al. The academic environment: the students' perspective. Eur J Dent Educ. 2008;12:120–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0579.2007.00494.x .

Guven Y, Uysal O. The importance of student research projects in dental education. Eur J Dent Educ. 2011;15(2):90–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0579.2010.00645.x .

Nalliah RP, Lee MK, Da Silva JD, Allareddy V. Impact of a research requirement in a dental school curriculum. J Dent Educ. 2014;78(10):1364–71.

Scott JE, de Vries J, Iacopino AM. 25-year analysis of a dental undergraduate research training program (BSc dent) at the University of Manitoba Faculty of dentistry. J Dent Res. 2008;87(12):1085–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910808701209 .

Jeelani W, Aslam SM, Elahi A. Current trends in undergraduate medical and dental research: a picture from Pakistan. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2014;26(2):162–6.

Ping W. Dental undergraduate students' participation in research in China: current state and directions. Eur J Dent Educ. 2015;19(3):177–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12119 .

Costa-Silva D, Cortes JA, Bachinski RF, Spiegel CN, Alves GG. Teaching cell biology to dental students with a project-based learning approach. J Dent Educ. 2018;82(3):322–31. https://doi.org/10.21815/JDE.018.032 .

Nieminen P, Uma E, Pal S, Laitala ML, Lappalainen OP, Varghese E. Information retrieval and awareness about evidence-based dentistry among dental undergraduate students-a comparative study between students from Malaysia and Finland. Dent J. 2020;8(3):103. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj8030103 .

Grossman ES, Naidoo S. Final-year south African dental student attitudes toward a research component in the curriculum. J Dent Educ. 2009;73(11):1306–12.

Franzén C, Brown G. Undergraduate degree projects in the Swedish dental schools: a documentary analysis. Eur J Dent Educ. 2013;17(2):122–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12022 .

Franzen C. The undergraduate degree project - preparing dental students for professional work and postgraduate studies? Eur J Dent Educ. 2014;18(4):207–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12088 .

Kyaw Soe HH, Than NN, Lwin H, Nu Htay MNN, Phyu KL, Abas AL. Knowledge, attitudes, and barriers toward research: the perspectives of undergraduate medical and dental students. J Educ Health Promot. 2018;7:23. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_61_17 .

Otuyemi OD, Olaniyi EA. A 5-year retrospective evaluation of undergraduate dental research projects in a Nigerian University: Graduates' perceptions of their learning experiences. Eur J Den Educ. 2020;24(2):292–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12497 .

Yu W, Sun Y, Miao M, Li L, Zhang Y, Zhang L, et al. Eleven-year experience implementing a dental undergraduate research program in a prestigious dental school in China: lessons learned and future prospects. Eur J Den Educ. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12598 .

Administrative measures for the National Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program for College Students. Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. https://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/gzdt_gzdt/s5987/201907/t20190731_393103.html . Published 2019. Assessed 4 Apr 2021

Wu ZY, Zhang ZY, Jiang XQ, Guo L. Comparison of dental education and professional development between mainland China and North America. Eur J Den Educ. 2010;14(2):106–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0579.2009.00599.x .

Huang C, Bian Z, Tai B, Fan M, Kwan CY. Dental education in Wuhan, China: challenges and changes. J Dent Educ. 2007;71(2):304–11.

Scott JE. Undergraduate experience in dental research: the bachelor of science (dentistry) program at the University of Manitoba. J Can Dent Assoc. 2008;74(10):883–5.

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 .

Habib SR, AlOtaibi SS, Abdullatif FA, AlAhmad IM. Knowledge and attitude of undergraduate dental students towards research. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2018;30(3):443–8.

Chmar JE, Weaver RG, Valachovic RW. Dental school vacant budgeted faculty positions: academic year 2004-05. J Dent Educ. 2006;70(2):188–98.

Chang Y, Ramnanan CJ. A review of literature on medical students and scholarly research: experiences, attitudes, and outcomes. Acad Med. 2015;90(8):1162–73. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000702 .

Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical educatioSn: AMEE guide no. 96. Med Teach. 2015;37(4):312–22. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.970998 .

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge Meirui Ma and Jiayu Li, who assisted in literature retrieval, and Lin Li and Yun Hong, who provided suggestions for this article.

This work was supported by the High Education Research Project for Young College Teachers of Guangdong Province (19GYB029), Guangdong Financial Fund for High-Caliber Hospital Construction (174–2018-XMZC-0001-03-0125/C-01), High Education Teaching Research and Reform Project of Guangdong Province, the Education Innovation Program for Postgraduates of Sun Yat-Sen University and Undergraduate Education Quality Program of Sun Yat-Sen University.

Author information

Haiwen Liu and Zhuohong Gong contributed equally to this article and meet authorship conditions.

Authors and Affiliations

Hospital of Stomatology, Guanghua School of Stomatology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Sun Yat-sen University, 56 Lingyuan Road West, Guangzhou, 510055, Guangdong, China

Haiwen Liu, Zhuohong Gong, Chen Ye, Xuejing Gan, Shijie Chen, Lin Li, Yun Hong, Junqing Xu, Zhengmei Lin & Zetao Chen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The manuscript was written through the contributions of all authors. Z.C. and Z.L. convinced the ideas and supervised this work. J.X. convinced the ideas. L.L. and Y.H. collected and analyzed the data. C.Y., X.G., and S.C. analyzed the data. H.L. and Z.G. drafted the articles. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

Haiwen Liu and Chen Ye are dental master candidates. Zhuohong Gong, Xuejing Gan, and Shijie Chen are dental undergraduate students. Lin Li is the lecturer and vice head of Student Administration. Yun Hong and Junqing Xu are associate professors and heads of Student Administration. Zhengmei Lin is Professor, and vice dean in charge of student education. Zetao Chen is Professor; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8344-2602 .

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Zhengmei Lin or Zetao Chen .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Reported as not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Liu, H., Gong, Z., Ye, C. et al. The picture of undergraduate dental basic research education: a scoping review. BMC Med Educ 22 , 569 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03628-9

Download citation

Received : 08 October 2021

Accepted : 12 July 2022

Published : 23 July 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03628-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Basic sciences
• Curriculum infrastructure
• Medical education research
• Undergraduate

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

• New Dentist News
• Member Login

by Mary Beth Versaci

June 12, 2022

Original Article

Pathways to dentistry: Researchers move dental profession forward

Contributions have lasting impact on oral health care.

Editor's note: This is the third article in a series that celebrates the diversity of career paths in dentistry and the Association's efforts in supporting dentists' career choices in the profession.

From examining the connections between oral and overall health to evaluating the behavior of materials used in dentistry, researchers ask the questions and do the work to inform how dentists care for their patients every day.

"Dentistry is an amazing profession that has offered so many of us the opportunity to improve patients' lives. It is critical that we continue to evolve and expand our understanding of the diseases and conditions that affect our patients and continue to work to optimize the treatments that they receive," said Mia Geisinger, D.D.S., professor and director of the Advanced Education Program in Periodontology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Dentistry. "My goal in research is always to change the way that we treat patients for the better, and while the pace of scientific discovery may be incremental, we continually strive to improve oral and overall health for all."

The American Dental Association recognizes the importance of research — like Dr. Geisinger's on the impact of periodontal disease and treatment on overall health — to the practice of dentistry. One of its core values is to be a science- and evidence-based organization, a goal that is supported by the ADA Science & Research Institute, which conducts research and produces evidence-based resources for dentists.

"Scientific research is so important to the health and advancement of the dental profession. That's why I'm really proud of the work ADASRI does," said Marcelo Araujo, D.D.S., Ph.D., chief science officer of the ADA and CEO of ADASRI. "At ADASRI, our work runs the gamut of scientific research — everything from basic science, like the creation of novel dental materials, to applied science that tests and refines dental materials, to clinical and translational research that communicates that basic and applied science in a way that is easy to implement chairside. As a whole, the work of ADASRI’s researchers, and really the work of all dental researchers, has a profound impact on improving dentistry."

The ADA also has two scientific journals: The Journal of the American Dental Association and JADA Foundational Science.

"The ADA continues to demonstrate its strong commitment to the health sciences through many avenues, including the dissemination of basic, translational and clinical research through its journals and other media offerings," said Jack L. Ferracane, Ph.D., editor-in-chief of JADA Foundational Science. "It all boils down to creating new and better pathways to oral health, and we all find it exciting and gratifying to play our different roles in the process that links discovery to successful clinical care."

A New Day for Dentistry, a campaign launched by ADA President Cesar R. Sabates, D.D.S., celebrates the ADA’s diverse community of dentists by recognizing their personal differences and the varied career paths they have chosen within the profession.

"Researchers are essential members of the dental workforce," Dr. Sabates said. "Clinicians strive to provide the best care they can to their patients, and researchers provide the evidence they need to make informed decisions. Their work also helps to expand dentistry’s knowledge base, driving innovation and advancement in our profession. The contributions of researchers have a lasting impact on all facets of oral health care."

For dentists who choose to pursue research as part of their career, a natural curiosity is key.

"I was exposed to research and science when I was in high school, and ever since, I was always interested in learning the underlying mechanisms of diseases," said Hatice Hasturk, D.D.S., Ph.D., director of the Center for Clinical and Translational Research and senior member of the staff at the Forsyth Institute. "I believe that without knowing what is really involved in tissues or structures we are working with, we cannot provide an effective and long-lasting solution."

Dr. Hasturk, who won the ADA’s 2020-21 Norton M. Ross Award for Excellence in Clinical Research and serves on the ADA Council on Scientific Affairs, teaches at the Boston University Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine and Harvard School of Dental Medicine and practices once a week as a staff dentist/periodontist at the Forsyth Faculty Associates Clinic. Her research focuses on periodontology and immunology.

Dr. Hasturk's studies have shown that changing the body's response to infections and diseases can reduce the oral disease it is experiencing, provide better stability and lead the body to produce more beneficial molecules that can help improve its defense system against other infections and diseases.

"As a dentist/periodontist, my goal is to provide the best prevention and best treatment to my patients," Dr. Hasturk said. "As a researcher, this goal drives me to better understand health and disease, not only to improve oral health, but also overall health."

For Rajesh Lalla, B.D.S., Ph.D., professor of oral medicine and associate dean for research at the University of Connecticut School of Dental Medicine, his favorite part of being a researcher is the ability to create new knowledge.

"It is extremely satisfying to be able to go through the process of having an idea, designing a study to test that hypothesis and determining what the truth really is," said Dr. Lalla, who studies the oral side effects of radiation therapy and chemotherapy used in the treatment of cancer.

His research team is working to publish results from a multicenter clinical study that enrolled more than 500 patients undergoing radiation therapy for head and neck cancer.

"One of the novel findings is that the radiation treatment led to a striking increase in gingival recession," said Dr. Lalla, who is the immediate past president of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer — the first dentist to hold the role. "It was known that these patients tend to get cervical caries after radiation therapy, but the reasons were not clear. Our finding indicates that exposure of the cervical areas of teeth due to gingival recession may explain the increased risk for cervical caries."

At the University of Connecticut, Dr. Lalla developed the dental school’s course on evidence-based decision making, which emphasizes the importance of evidence to the practice of dentistry.

"Dentistry is a scientific profession. The care we provide for our patients must be evidence based," said Dr. Lalla, who won the ADA’s 2020 Evidence-Based Dentistry Accomplished Faculty Award. "Research provides that evidence, so research is the very foundation of our profession."

With a background in engineering, Nathaniel Lawson, D.M.D., Ph.D., performs applied dental materials research at the University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Dentistry, where he is an associate professor, director of the biomaterials residency program and director of the division of biomaterials. He and his team devise testing equipment and protocols to evaluate dental materials to best predict their clinical performance, and they are perhaps most well known for performing wear testing. His lab is currently testing the wear of new 3D-printed materials being developed for dentures, crowns and occlusal guards.

"There are many different types of dental research. Many dentists may think of the incredible scientific work conducted by basic and translational scientists who are working to develop new treatments, materials and drugs to treat dental and oral conditions," said Dr. Lawson, who won the ADA's 2016 John W. Stanford New Investigator Award. "However, there is still research needed to evaluate the materials that are already in clinical use in order to determine the best uses of these materials. This information can help the clinician better perform work in their office."

Dr. Lawson began conducting research when he was applying to dental school at the University of Alabama. After a brief stint in clinical practice following graduation, his dental school research adviser asked if he would be interested in returning to his alma mater for an academic position performing research and teaching.

"Within a couple years of working in the position, I realized that I really loved what I was doing," Dr. Lawson said. "I really enjoy thinking of clinical problems, performing a study to try to better understand the best clinical treatment, trying what I learned in practice and then sharing that information through teaching."

Dr. Geisinger, too, was initially unsure of her career path and thought she would go into private practice until she began volunteering as a faculty member at a dental school.

"When I thought about the opportunity to make an exponential impact on our profession through education, research and service, I knew that I had to try to make the biggest impact I could on the oral health of patients and communities," she said. "And it is the research part of that mission that allows me to have the widest reach — impacting the global delivery of dental care through incremental discovery."

Dr. Geisinger, who is a member of the ADASRI Board of Directors and secretary-treasurer of the American Academy of Periodontology, is currently involved in a project examining best practices for delivering oral hygiene care to people with dementia in skilled nursing facilities, as well as the impact of periodontal health on the development and progression of dementia.

The research dentists perform has a lasting impact on not only the profession but public health as well.

"Dentists are an integral part of health care, and as an important health care provider, we need to base what we do on science and biology in order to offer evidence-based, scientifically proven and solid approaches to our patients," Dr. Hasturk said. "They are hungry to learn from us to do better at home and in their lives and to be examples to their children and young generations. We can only be better prepared for the future with proper education, and proper education is a result of research."

Most Read View More

Recommended content.

Arginine and the Healthy Oral Microbiome

Leveraging artificial intelligence to improve clinical outcomes

Enhance clear aligner oversight with CandidMonitoring™

The Hall Technique for Modern Pediatric Caries Management

Join the ADA

Elevate your career, your life and your momentum with resources and benefits from the nation’s leading dental association

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Dent J (Basel)

Hot Topics in Clinical Oral Implants Research: Recent Trends in Literature Coverage

Vesela valkova.

1 Medical University of Vienna, Bernhard Gottlieb School of Dentistry, Sensengasse 2a, A-1090 Vienna, Austria; [email protected] (V.V.); moc.oohay@aneeneec (C.U.M.)

Ceeneena Ubaidha Maheen

Bernhard pommer.

2 Academy for Oral Implantology, Lazarettgasse 19/DG, A-1090 Vienna, Austria

Xiaohui Rausch-Fan

3 Medical University of Vienna, Rausch-Fan Laboratory, Sensengasse 2a, A-1090 Vienna, Austria; [email protected]

Rudolf Seemann

4 Medical University of Vienna, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria; [email protected]

This systematic review looks at thematic trends in clinical research publications on dental implants. For this purpose, MEDLINE electronic searches as well as additional hand searches of six main journals in the field were conducted. A total of 2875 clinical studies published between 2001 and 2012 met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to statistical analysis. Hot topics in dental implant literature included immediate loading (14.3%), bone substitutes (11.6%), cross-arch full bridges (8.0%), and immediate implant placement (7.5%). A significant increase in scientific interest for immediate loading (+6.3%, p = 0.001), platform switching (+2.9%, p = 0.001), guided implant surgery (+1.9%, p = 0.011), growth factors ( p = 0.014, +1.4%), piezoelectric surgery (+1.3%, p = 0.015), and restorative materials (+0.7%, p = 0.011) was found. A declining scientific interest in onlay grafting (−0.3%, p = 0.042) was recorded. The findings regarding current clinical oral implants research tie in with better-informed consumers and increased patient demands. Our results demonstrate an increasing interest in techniques that avoid complicated procedures such as bone grafting and that reduce treatment duration.

1. Introduction

The present special issue of Dentistry Journal deals with “Advances in Implant Dentistry,” and the following keywords denote hot topics in this field: template-guided implant placement, minimally invasive techniques, short lengths and reduced implant diameters, novel bone grafting techniques, medically compromised patients, peri-implantitis treatment, immediate placement and restoration, transition from a failing dentition, CAD/CAM prosthetics, and optical intraoral impressions. As the first paper in this special issue, the following review aims to provide the background to recent trends and “hot topics” in advanced and minimally invasive oral implant treatment [ 1 ].

The concept of osseointegration of oral implants was introduced by Branemark 40 years ago and set the precedent for new knowledge in oral medicine. Since then, oral implantology has become one of the most investigated topics in dental medicine, with exponential growth in the use of implant products [ 2 ]. Data shows that the number of implants used for oral rehabilitation in the USA increased ten-fold between 1983 and 2002 and also ten-fold from 2000 to 2010 [ 3 ]. While previously the primary aim of research on oral implantology was to find ways to rehabilitate function [ 4 ], many efforts nowadays are focused on the shortening of treatment procedures, simplifying surgical techniques, and esthetic improvement [ 5 ]. It is well known that oral implantology is a prosthetically driven field with a major surgical component [ 6 ]. Therefore, the current state of the art in implant dentistry represents advances in both surgical and prosthodontic techniques [ 5 ].

Keeping pace with research development, the aim of this systematic review was to investigate contemporary issues in oral implantology research and to perform a topical trend analysis of clinical studies published in the time period from 2001 to 2012.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. search strategy.

A MEDLINE electronic literature search was conducted, limited to clinical studies on dental implants published between 2001 and 2012. The search term “dental implant,” sorted by “year of publication” was used in order to capture all relevant articles [ 7 ]. Additional hand searching was performed to examine six main journals in the field: The International Journal of Maxillofacial Implants , Journal of Oral Implantology , Clinical Oral Implant Related Research , Implant Dentistry , European Journal of Oral Implantology , and Clinical Oral Implant Research . Two reviewers independently identified all trials [ 8 ]. The PubMed search initially identified 15,695 publications, and 5048 additional results were identified by hand search. These studies were screened for their relevance based upon a threshold set [ 9 ]:

• inclusion criteria: prospective and retrospective studies, cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, case reports with at least 10 patients
• exclusion criteria: non-English publications, statistical studies, animal studies, finite element analyses, in vitro studies, review articles, and case series with fewer than 10 patients.

A total number of 3695 articles were subjected to abstract review. Where the abstract provided little information, a full text analysis was performed. Authors of potentially relevant publications, which were not available or lacked data, were contacted and asked for cooperation. Ultimately, 2875 clinical studies were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Our goal was to investigate how trends change over time as regards the topics examined in modern implant dentistry research. In this respect, we have determined that 31 topics were appropriate: 23 of them concerned surgical issues and 8 dealt with prosthodontic issues ( Table 1 ). First, all relevant publications were screened for the topics listed in Table 1 independently by two reviewers. Thereafter, the results were verified, and all doubtful publications were discussed before the final decision was taken.

Topics sorted by literature coverage. Absolute numbers of publications per year as well as the total percentage of all clinical papers 2001–2012 (* indicates prosthodontic topics).

2.2. Statistical Analysis

As mentioned above, 2875 publications were analyzed. In order to find statistical trends in respect to the relevant topics between 2001 and 2012, Poisson regression analysis was performed, taking the level of significance as p ≤ 0.05, using R-project statistical software version 3.1.0. This statistical test was used to model count data, which in this case was the number of publications. p -values were calculated for every topic, taking into account the relative number publications per topic from the total number of publications.

The surgical and prosthodontic topics of interest were computed as percentages of the total number of publications ( Table 1 ). Among the most covered surgical topics in the literature were immediate loading (14.3%), bone substitutes (11.6%), immediate implant placement (7.5%), simultaneous implant placement with bone augmentation (6.4%), onlay grafting (4.3%), medically compromised patients (4.0%), healing modality (3.7%), transcrestal sinus floor elevation (3.0%), flapless surgery (2.7%), socket grafting (2.6%), and guided surgery (2.4%). Immediate loading (14.3%), cross-arch implant bridges (8.0%), early loading (4.5%), and platform switching (1.7%) were ranked as the most prevalent prosthodontic issues in current oral implant research.

The surgical issues were the more prevalent topics, demonstrating an increasing rate of publications over the time in terms of mean coverage (0.53 ± 0.01) per publication ( Figure 1 ), as compared to prosthodontic issues (0.33 ± 0.05 hits). The mean coverage values were estimated based on yearly ratios: the number of prosthodontic/surgical publications per year in relation to the total number of publications per year. The significant increase in publications on surgical issues over the years was demonstrated by Poisson regression analysis ( p = 0.002).

Literature coverage of surgical (s) versus prosthodontic (p) issues: x-axis indicates year of publication, y-axis indicates the ratio of numbers of publications (surgical/prosthodontic) to the total number of publications per year.

A total of eight topics showed significant trends ( p < 0.05) over the years 2001 to 2012 ( Table 2 ). Immediate loading demonstrated the highest increase with a positive change of +6.3% and p = 0.001 ( Figure 2 a). Platform switching (+2.9%, p = 0.001) was the second topic showing a significant increase; however, only one relevant article was detected between 2001 and 2006 ( Figure 2 b). These topics were followed by guided implant surgery (+1.9%, p = 0.011), growth factors (+1.4%, p = 0.014), piezoelectric surgery (+1.3%, p = 0.015), and restorative materials (+0.7%, p = 0.011). The green line represents the percentage of the total number of publications for every year. The black trend line reveals the relationship between the year of publication (x-variable) and the percentage of the total number of publications (y-variable). Since there were no publications on platform switching between 2002 and 2005, there is a negative trend line intercept starting from 2001 ( Figure 2 b). Decreasing scientific interest and a corresponding downward trend were recorded for the topic onlay grafting (−0.3%, p = 0.042).

Trend curves (percentage out of the total number of publications per year) for ( a ) immediate loading; ( b ) platform switching; ( c ) flapless implant surgery; ( d ) guided implant surgery; ( e ) growth factors; ( f ) piezoelectric surgery; ( g )restorative materials; and ( h ) onlay grafting.

Topics demonstrating a significant increase (positive) or decrease (negative change) of scientific interest in the years 2001–2012.

4. Discussion

Comparisons of published clinical trials per year revealed a trend of increasing interest in conducting clinical trials, starting with 137 relevant articles in the year 2001 and reaching the number of 446 publications in the year 2012. However, even the total number of 3695 articles is smaller than the total number of 4655 clinical studies published between 1989 and 1999 reported by Russo et al. [ 10 ]. Given that the number of publications increased with every year, it was considered more appropriate to perform Poisson regression analysis related to percentage-based values rather than related to absolute values for all topics.

Immediate loading proved to be the most studied topic in the last decade ( Figure 2 a). This avid scientific interest can be explained by several advantages it offers, such as shortened treatment protocols, immediate rehabilitation of the function, and high patient satisfaction. Meta-analyses on single-tooth implant placement have shown encouraging results for the immediate loading protocol as a promising alternative to conventional loading, as it may be equally successful and may not significantly affect marginal bone resorption and implant success rates [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]. Another meta-analysis by Papaspyridakos et al. [ 14 ] reported that there was no significant difference between immediate, early, and conventional loading in edentulous patients with fixed prostheses, and all three protocols showed a high level of success. However, other reviewers disagree with this assessment of the unimpaired success of the immediate loading protocol. A meta-analysis of clinical studies comparing the immediate and conventional loading of single tooth implants discovered that immediate loading has a significantly higher risk of implant failure [ 15 ]. Schimmel and coworkers [ 16 ] concluded that, despite the high implant survival rates, the conventional and early loading protocols are superior to immediate loading as better documented protocols, providing better results in the first year of loading. A survey among implantologists from 16 countries all over the world stated that immediate loading was the treatment protocol most accepted by dentists in Australia and Europe [ 17 ]. Based on these controversial statements in the literature, it can be concluded that there is still a lack of well-designed RCTs concerning loading protocol [ 18 ] and immediate loading may well retain its place as a hot topic of discussion over the coming years.

The platform-switching concept arose in 1980 with the introduction of the wide diameter implants. Due to the lack of commercially available matching components for wide diameter implants, the standard-diameter abutments were used. Later, it was found that “platform-switched” implants demonstrated osseointegration with less initial crestal bone loss and were thus superior to the “platform-matched implants” [ 19 ]. However, the first introduction of this concept appeared in 2005 [ 20 ]. Radiographic observation over a period of 13 years demonstrated that platform switching resulted in little or no crestal bone loss as compared to the conventional implants, whereas marginal bone resorption of 1.5 mm on average was accepted as one of the criteria for success of the dental implant [ 21 ]. Our study shows that the increasing publication rate of clinical studies happened to coincide with the first official introduction of this concept, with a positive linear trend for this topic starting in 2005 ( Figure 2 b). Since guided surgery is performed in combination with the flapless procedure in most cases, [ 22 ] the similarity in literature coverage, illustrated in both scatter plots, does not come as a surprise ( Figure 2 c,d).

In contrast to the last decade of the 20th century, when the main progress in the field of oral implant research was made in alveolar bone resorption management to refine the different graft techniques [ 23 ], our findings show that in the 21st century there has been increasing interest in methods developed to overcome the grafting procedures and even a loss of interest in one of the most used augmentation techniques, i.e. , onlay bone grafting. It seems that dental implant scientific work is inspired more by the patient’s appraisals [ 24 ], seeking to improve minimally invasive surgical techniques [ 25 ], diminish patient morbidity, and shorten the treatment time. However, the role of industrial funding for conducting clinical studies should be taken into consideration. 32.4% of the clinical trials are supported by industry as a source of funding, which is a suitable way for companies not only to comply with safety and efficacy standards, but also to introduce their new products to the market [ 26 ]. This industry sponsorship may lead to biased reporting and pro-industry conclusions [ 27 ]. This does have the potential to reflect on ongoing trends in clinical research. In this connection for instance, the relatively innovative technique of guided implant surgery provides less painful and invasive treatment but at the same time is a more difficult and expensive procedure than conventional implant placement, demonstrating the same survival rate. However, a survey by Hof and coworkers [ 28 ] showed that the main priority for the patients when it comes to implant therapy remains the predictability of treatment success. The achievements brought about by ongoing clinical research, such as improved quality, ease of use of implant systems, as well as shorter treatment duration [ 29 ] may provide grounds for future researchers to face the challenge of preserving the perspectives of clinical implant research, and specifically, to enhance the relationship between private practice and science without involving marketing.

In order to adhere to ethical rules on explicit reporting, including also the disadvantages of any study, the researchers are obligated to report their study’s limitations. Undoubtedly, meta-analysis is the “gold standard” for performing any systematic review aiming at assessing treatment effects. Given that the variable investigated in the present study was the number of publications, the Poisson regression was selected as a statistical tool. The Poisson regression is used to model count data (in the present case this is the number of publications) and is an appropriate statistical method for predicting trends. Therefore, no methods estimating risk of bias, quality design, or heterogeneity of the studies provided by the meta-analysis were applied in this study.

A further limitation is presented by the use of only one database source. The findings in the present work are based on analysis, including studies from MEDLINE, and an additional hand search of six journals. However, the search strategy did not consider other databases such as EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.

In conclusion, the analysis of scientific literature on dental implants revealed several hot topics in the time period between 2001 and 2012. The most frequently covered surgical issues were bone substitutes (11.6%) and immediate implant placement, (7.5%), while the most prevalent prosthodontic topics involved immediate loading (14.3%) and cross-arch full bridges (8.0%). Given that the topics demonstrating the highest increase in interest were prosthodontic topics, i.e. , immediate loading (+6.3%) and platform switching (+2.9%), the interest in researching prosthodontic topics will most likely continue to increase.

Acknowledgments

No funding was received to support the study.

Author Contributions

Bernhard Pommer conceived and designed the experiments; Vesela Valkova and Ceeneena Ubaidha Maheen performed the experiments; Rudolf Seemann analyzed the data; Xiaohui Rausch-Fan contributed analysis tools; Vesela Valkova wrote the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Recent research trends in dentistry

Affiliations.

• 1 Centre of Studies in Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Sungai Buloh Campus, University Technology MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia.
• 2 Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Sharad Pawar Dental College, Wardha, Maharashtra, India.
• 3 Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, NIMS Dental College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.
• PMID: 28492186
• DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.206038

Research being an investigative process is employed to increase or revise the current knowledge. Scientific research involves the conduct of a methodical study to prove a hypothesis or give an answer to a specific question with the main aim of finding definitive answer. This paper aims to advance knowledge of research and develop interest in the postgraduate students. It also throws light on the existing and emerging research strengths within a "high-performance culture." The trends in dental research worldwide are looked at, in particular, a comparison between the publication status in two countries, namely India and Australia. The current themes in dental research are also discussed to facilitate future projects for the aspiring pediatric dentists. Stress is given to the importance of evidence-based dentistry as the current times call for high-quality and ethical papers which are devoid of plagiarism. The common reasons for failure of a research are explored and the strengthening factors are highlighted. Proper planning of a pertinent research project is beneficial to the researcher as well as the dental community.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• The evolution of dental journals from 2003 to 2012: a bibliometric analysis. Jayaratne YS, Zwahlen RA. Jayaratne YS, et al. PLoS One. 2015 Mar 17;10(3):e0119503. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119503. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 25781486 Free PMC article.
• Trends in World Dental Research: an overview of the last three decades using the Web of Science. Pulgar R, Jiménez-Fernández I, Jiménez-Contreras E, Torres-Salinas D, Lucena-Martín C. Pulgar R, et al. Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Sep;17(7):1773-83. doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0862-6. Epub 2012 Oct 26. Clin Oral Investig. 2013. PMID: 23099725 Review.
• 30 Years of dental research in Australia and India: a comparative analysis of published peer review literature. Madan C, Kruger E, Tennant M. Madan C, et al. Indian J Dent Res. 2012 Mar-Apr;23(2):293-4. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.100447. Indian J Dent Res. 2012. PMID: 22945730
• Publication bias and its implications for evidence-based clinical decision making. Crawford JM, Briggs CL, Engeland CG. Crawford JM, et al. J Dent Educ. 2010 Jun;74(6):593-600. J Dent Educ. 2010. PMID: 20516298 Review.
• Dental trauma: an evidence-based approach to care. de França Caldas A Jr, Soriano EP, Rosenblatt A, de Melo EH, de Miranda Coelho LG. de França Caldas A Jr, et al. Dent Traumatol. 2009 Apr;25(2):190-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2008.00748.x. Dent Traumatol. 2009. PMID: 19290898
• Global Dental Publications in PubMed Databases between 2009 and 2019-A Bibliometric Analysis. Yahya Asiri F, Kruger E, Tennant M. Yahya Asiri F, et al. Molecules. 2020 Oct 16;25(20):4747. doi: 10.3390/molecules25204747. Molecules. 2020. PMID: 33081141 Free PMC article.
• Scientific Production in Dentistry: The National Panorama through a Bibliometric Study of Italian Academies. Lorusso F, Inchingolo F, Scarano A. Lorusso F, et al. Biomed Res Int. 2020 Aug 5;2020:3468303. doi: 10.1155/2020/3468303. eCollection 2020. Biomed Res Int. 2020. PMID: 32832546 Free PMC article. Review.

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Ovid Technologies, Inc.

Other Literature Sources

• scite Smart Citations

Miscellaneous

• NCI CPTAC Assay Portal
• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Current Research in Dentistry

Aims and scope.

Current Research in Dentistry cover articles on evaluation, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of diseases, disorders and conditions of the soft and hard tissues of the jaw, the oral cavity, maxillofacial area and the adjacent and associated structures and their impact on the human body. Current Research in Dentistry is an international, peer reviewed journal publish two times a year.

It is with great pleasure that we announce the SGAMR Annual Awards 2020. This award is given annually to Researchers and Reviewers of International Journal of Structural Glass and Advanced Materials Research (SGAMR) who have shown innovative contributions and promising research as well as others who have excelled in their Editorial duties.

This special issue "Neuroinflammation and COVID-19" aims to provide a space for debate in the face of the growing evidence on the affectation of the nervous system by COVID-19, supported by original studies and case series.

The SGAMR Editorial Board is pleased to announce the inauguration of the yearly “SGAMR Young Researcher Award” (SGAMR-YRA). The best paper published by a young researcher will be selected by a journal committee, from the Editorial Board.

• Recently Published
• Most Viewed
• Most Downloaded

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Research: The Most Common DEI Practices Actually Undermine Diversity

• Traci Sitzmann,
• Shoshana Schwartz,
• Mary Lee Stansifer

Organizations over-rely on approaches that consistently fail to diversify management ranks — and overlook those that have proven effective.

While companies say they champion diversity, there are glaring disparities in diverse representation within managerial ranks. The authors examine the impact of various management practices on diverse representation in managerial roles and how often each management practice is utilized in organizations, shedding light on why organizations are not making greater progress toward diverse representation. Despite not working well for attaining diverse representation, diversity training is widely used in organizations. In contrast, formal mentoring programs and targeted recruitment are effective for increasing diverse representation but are underused. Indeed, the relationship between how often management practices are implemented in organizations and their effectiveness in attaining diverse representation is negative and strong. This article breaks down the practices organizations should utilize to achieve diverse representation, underscoring the need to shift toward practices that increase diverse representation in management.

Despite the U.S. population’s growing diversity , managerial roles are still predominantly held by white men. While the largest firms have been pledging to recruit and train Black workers for over 40 years, there has been little increase in Black representation in managerial roles during this timeframe. In a 2021 analysis , Black employees held only 7% of managerial roles despite comprising 14% of all employees. Women have difficulty attaining leadership roles despite evidence that “women are more likely than men to lead in a style that is effective.”

• TS Traci Sitzmann is a Professor of Management and Workforce Development Scholar at the University of Colorado Denver.
• SS Shoshana Schwartz is an Assistant Professor of Management at Christopher Newport University’s Luter School of Business.
• MS Mary Lee Stansifer is an Assistant Teaching Professor at the University of Colorado Denver.

Partner Center

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Globally, Biden Receives Higher Ratings Than Trump

Still, most disapprove of how biden has dealt with the israel-hamas war, table of contents.

• Views of the U.S.
• Confidence in Biden, Trump and other world leaders
• Differences by ideology, age and gender
• 1. Views of the U.S.
• 2. Confidence in Joe Biden
• 3. Confidence in Donald Trump
• 4. Comparing confidence in Macron, Putin and Xi to ratings of Biden and Trump
• Biden’s handling of global economic problems
• Biden’s handling of climate change
• Biden’s handling of China
• Biden’s handling of the Russia-Ukraine war
• Biden’s handling of the Israel-Hamas war
• 6. Is U.S. democracy a good example to follow?
• Appendix A: Favorability of the United States since 2000
• Appendix B: Confidence in the U.S. president since 2001
• Acknowledgments
• About Pew Research Center’s Spring 2024 Global Attitudes Survey

This Pew Research Center analysis focuses on public opinion of the United States, President Joe Biden and other world leaders. It also explores what people think about Biden’s handling of international issues and their perceptions of American democracy. The study includes publics in 34 countries across the Asia-Pacific region, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, North America and sub-Saharan Africa.

This analysis draws on nationally representative surveys of 40,566 adults conducted from Jan. 5 to May 21, 2024. All surveys were conducted over the phone with adults in Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Surveys were conducted face to face in Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ghana, Hungary, India, Israel, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tunisia and Turkey. In Australia, we used a mixed-mode probability-based online panel.

Throughout the report, we analyze respondents’ attitudes based on where they place themselves on an ideological scale. We asked about political ideology using several slightly different scales and categorized people as being on the ideological left, center or right.

• In most countries, we asked people to place themselves on a scale ranging from “Extreme left” to “Extreme right.” The question was asked this way in Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Turkey and the United Kingdom.
• In Australia, the scale ranged from “Left” to “Right”.
• In Japan, Singapore, South Korea and Thailand, ideology was measured on a scale from “Extremely progressive” to “Extremely conservative.”
• Ideology was not asked about in Ghana, India, Kenya, Malaysia, Sri Lanka or Tunisia. 

Prior to 2024, combined totals were based on rounded topline figures. For all reports beginning in 2024, totals are based on unrounded topline figures, so combined totals might be different than in previous years. Refer to the 2024 topline to see our new rounding procedures applied to past years’ data.

Here are the questions used for the report, along with responses, and the survey methodology .

With many around the world closely following the fiercely contested rematch between U.S. President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump, a new Pew Research Center survey finds that, internationally, Biden is viewed more positively than his rival.

Across the 34 nations polled, a median of 43% have confidence in Biden to do the right thing regarding world affairs, while just 28% have confidence in Trump. The gap between ratings is quite wide in many countries, especially in Europe. Biden’s confidence rating is at least 40 percentage points higher than Trump’s in Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Sweden.

However, there are exceptions. There is no statistically significant difference in ratings of Biden and Trump in eight nations we surveyed. And people in Hungary and Tunisia give Trump more positive reviews than Biden, although neither leader gets especially high marks there. (The survey was conducted before Trump’s conviction in a state criminal trial in New York.)

Even though Biden gets better assessments than Trump globally, ratings for the current U.S. president are down since last year in 14 of 21 countries where trends are available, including by double digits in Australia, Israel, Japan, Poland, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

The survey included a series of questions about how Biden is handling major international issues. Overall, opinions are divided on how he is dealing with climate change and global economic problems.

Across the 34 countries polled, a median of around four-in-ten approve of how Biden is dealing with China and with the war between Russia and Ukraine (39% each).

The president gets his most negative reviews on his handling of the Israel-Hamas war: A median of just 31% approve of the way he is handling the conflict, while 57% disapprove. (The survey was conducted prior to Biden announcing a proposal to end the conflict .)

Research in the West Bank and Gaza

Pew Research Center has polled the Palestinian territories in previous years, but we were unable to conduct fieldwork in Gaza or the West Bank for our Spring 2024 survey due to security concerns. We are actively investigating possibilities for both qualitative and quantitative research on public opinion in the region and hope to be able to share data from the region in the coming months.

Six-in-ten Israelis disapprove of how Biden is handling the war, including 53% of Jewish Israelis and 86% of Arab Israelis. (For more on how Israelis rate Biden, read “Israeli Views of the Israel-Hamas War.” )

Of the predominantly Muslim nations surveyed, large majorities in Malaysia, Tunisia and Turkey also disapprove of Biden’s handling of the Israel-Hamas war. Opinion is divided on this issue in Bangladesh.

The new survey finds that overall attitudes toward the United States are generally positive: A median of 54% across the nations polled have a favorable view of the U.S., while 31% have a negative opinion.

However, criticisms of American democracy are common in many nations. We asked respondents whether U.S. democracy is a good example for other countries to follow, used to be a good example but has not been in recent years, or has never been a good example.

The predominant view in most countries is that the U.S. used to be a good model but has not been recently. Overall, a median of 21% believe it is currently a good example, while 22% say it has never been a good model for other countries.

In eight of the 13 countries where trends are available, fewer people say American democracy is a good example than said so in spring 2021, when we last asked this question.

For this report, we surveyed 40,566 people in 34 countries – not including the U.S. – from Jan. 5 to May 21, 2024. In addition to this overview, the report includes chapters on:

• Attitudes toward the United States
• Ratings of Biden
• Ratings of Trump
• Views of Biden and Trump compared with other world leaders
• Views about Biden’s handling of major foreign policy issues
• Is the U.S. a good example of democracy?

Read some of the report’s key findings below.

At least half of those in most countries surveyed express a favorable opinion of the U.S. Poles are the most positive, at 86% favorable. Of the European nations surveyed, ratings also lean positive in Italy, Hungary and the UK. Elsewhere in Europe, however, opinions tend to be closely divided.

Attitudes toward the U.S. are largely favorable in the Asia-Pacific nations polled, especially Japan, the Philippines, South Korea and Thailand. However, most Australians and Malaysians give the U.S. poor marks.

In the Middle East-North Africa region, a 77% majority of Israelis view the U.S. favorably, although this is down from 87% last year. Large majorities in Tunisia and Turkey offer an unfavorable opinion.

The U.S. gets mostly positive ratings in the sub-Saharan African and Latin American nations surveyed. Two-thirds or more see the U.S. favorably in Colombia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria and Peru.

Refer to Appendix A  for long-term trends on views of the U.S.

Pew Research Center has explored attitudes toward American presidents for over two decades, finding significant shifts in opinions over the years. Data from four Western European nations that we have surveyed consistently – France, Germany, Spain and the UK – shows long-term trends in views of recent presidents.

George W. Bush received low and declining ratings during his time in the White House, while Barack Obama got mostly high marks. Attitudes toward Donald Trump were overwhelmingly negative throughout his presidency. Biden has consistently received more positive reviews than his predecessor, but his ratings have declined in these four countries during his time in office.

There are nine nations in this year’s survey where six-in-ten adults or more express confidence in Biden. Four are in Europe (Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Sweden), two are in the Asia-Pacific region (the Philippines and Thailand) and three are in sub-Saharan Africa (Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria).

Since last year, confidence in Biden has dropped significantly in 14 nations: Seven in Europe, plus Australia, Canada, Israel, Japan, Mexico, South Africa and South Korea. Biden gets his lowest ratings in Turkey and Tunisia, where only about one-in-ten express confidence in him.

The two countries where at least six-in-ten adults have confidence in Trump are Nigeria and the Philippines. Like Biden, Trump gets one of his lowest ratings in Turkey, where just 10% view him favorably.

Confidence in Trump has increased slightly in a few European countries since we last asked about him in 2020, although his ratings remain quite low in Europe.

In contrast, Trump’s ratings have become more negative in Poland since 2019, which was the last year we asked about him there. Israeli views toward the former president have also become more negative over the past five years.

Refer to Appendix B  for long-term trends in confidence in U.S. presidents.  

In addition to exploring confidence in Biden and Trump, the survey asked about trust in French President Emmanuel Macron, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Overall, Macron receives the most positive ratings across the countries in the study, followed closely by Biden. The French president gets higher ratings than his U.S. counterpart in many of the European nations surveyed. Both Xi and Putin receive mostly poor marks across the countries in the study.

• In 17 of the 28 countries where political ideology is measured, people on the right are more likely to have a positive opinion of the U.S. than those on the left. For example, 65% of people on the right in Spain view the U.S. favorably, compared with 26% of people on the left.
• In 18 countries, people on the right are more likely to express confidence in Trump than those on the left. The gap is especially large in Israel, where 75% of those on the right have confidence in him, compared with just 23% of Israelis on the left.
• There are also some sizable ideological differences on views about Biden’s handling of the Israel-Hamas war. In several countries – including about half of the European countries surveyed – people on the right are more likely than those on the left to approve of how Biden is handling the conflict.

• In several countries – including Canada, all Latin American countries surveyed and several countries in the Asia-Pacific region – adults under 35 are more likely to have a positive opinion of the U.S. when compared with adults ages 50 and older. Australia, Israel and Sweden are the only countries where younger adults have a less favorable view of the U.S.
• In Canada, Australia and seven of the 10 European countries surveyed, young adults are less likely than older adults to approve of how Biden is dealing with the Israel-Hamas war .
• Men have more confidence in Trump than women do in many of the countries surveyed. The largest difference is in the UK, where men are about twice as likely as women to trust the former U.S. president. In many of the countries surveyed, women are less likely than men to answer this question at all.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• China Global Image
• Donald Trump
• Environment & Climate
• International Political Values
• Presidential Approval
• U.S. Global Image
• Vladimir Putin
• War & International Conflict
• World Leaders

How Americans and Israelis view one another and the U.S. role in the Israel-Hamas war

In east asia, many people see china’s power and influence as a major threat, how views of the u.s., china and their leaders have changed over time, comparing views of the u.s. and china in 24 countries, poles and hungarians differ over views of russia and the u.s., most popular, report materials.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Other journals in brief
• Published: 26 July 2019

Which dental research topics are relevant to patients?

• Paul Hellyer 1  

British Dental Journal volume  227 ,  page 113 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

239 Accesses

Metrics details

You have full access to this article via your institution.

Kakudate N, Yokoyama Y, Sumida F et al. Practice-based research agendas priorities selected by patients: findings from a practice-based research network. Int Dent J 2019; 69: 183−191.

Study shows priorities differ with age and gender.

'Public involvement in research is defined as research that is done with or by the public and not to, about or for them' (Involve www.invo.org.uk ) and many grant funders now require evidence of public and patient involvement in research projects. The research agenda, however, may still be being set by academics and not by patients. Relatively little research is based in general practice.

Using a questionnaire with patients in 11 dental clinics in Japan, Kakudate and colleagues have attempted to find out which research topics would be important and relevant to patients. Involving patients 'may provide opportunities to produce research which is valid, relevant, acceptable, sustainable and innovative.'

Following a pilot study, a 31 item questionnaire, divided into 11 categories was developed (orthodontic treatment, regular dental check ups, prognosis of dental treatment, dental implants, tooth brushing, diet and food, aesthetic dental care, topical fluoride application, social health insurance, bruxism and miscellaneous) and was completed by 482 patients (87.6% response rate).

The most commonly selected research agenda was 'age specific care to maintain oral health' (n = 84), followed closely by topics related to toothpastes and brushing, the durability of restorations and questions relating to diet, caries and periodontal disease. The least popular topic related to the use of interdental cleaning aids. In patients <40, selection of toothpaste was the most popular topic. Only responders <30 listed the timing of wisdom teeth extractions and orthodontic as topics. Only those aged >60 listed the durability of restorations in relation to treatment available under the national health insurance scheme.

Statistically significant age and gender differences were noted. Younger patients rated orthodontic treatment, aesthetic dental care and fluoride applications more frequently than older patients. Older patients rated regular dental check ups, implants, diet and health insurance as more interesting than younger ones. Females rated aesthetics as more important than did males, who rated toothbrushing as more interesting than did females.

Responses may be different from within a different culture. However, these results clearly show that different age groups have differing priorities with regard to research priorities. If research is to be patient centred and relevant, then shaping research questions around actual patients' concerns, needs and values assumes greater importance. These results may 'help research funders identify future priorities that have the greatest impact on patients and the clinicians who treat them.'

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Honorary Teaching Fellow, University of Portsmouth Dental Academy, Portsmouth, UK

Paul Hellyer

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Hellyer, P. Which dental research topics are relevant to patients?. Br Dent J 227 , 113 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-019-0567-1

Download citation

Published : 26 July 2019

Issue Date : July 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-019-0567-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies