This study confirmed the hypothesis that new bone formation is dependent on the DFDBA formulation used and demonstrated that DBX, alone or in combination with other materials, can be used successfully for sinus floor elevation.
Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the USA, but there is minimal data on how oncology is taught to medical students. The purpose of this study is to characterize oncology education at US medical schools. An electronic survey was sent between December 2014 and February 2015 to a convenience sample of medical students who either attended the American Society for Radiation Oncology annual meeting or serve as delegates to the American Association of Medical Colleges. Information on various aspects of oncology instruction at participants’ medical schools was collected. Seventy-six responses from students in 28 states were received. Among the six most common causes of death in the USA, cancer reportedly received the fourth most curricular time. During the first, second, and third years of medical school, participants most commonly reported 6–10, 16–20, and 6–10 h of oncology teaching, respectively. Participants were less confident in their understanding of cancer treatment than workup/ diagnosis or basic science/natural history of cancer (p<0.01). During the preclinical years, pathologists, scientists/Ph.D.’s, and medical oncologists reportedly performed the majority of teaching, whereas during the clinical clerkships, medical and surgical oncologists reportedly performed the majority of teaching. Radiation oncologists were significantly less involved during both periods (p<0.01). Most schools did not require any oncology-oriented clerkship. During each mandatory rotation, ≤20 % of patients had a primary diagnosis of cancer. Oncology education is often underemphasized and fragmented with wide variability in content and structure between medical schools, suggesting a need for reform.
ObjectivePreclinical medical student electives are prevalent at medical schools across the United States, but the range of electives available and their impact on medical student education are not well described in the literature. The objective of this article is to review the literature relating to preclinical medical student electives and their impact on medical student educational outcomes.MethodsWe reviewed studies that met the following criteria: English-language articles describing preclinical US-based medical electives. We used PubMed journal databases and limited our search for the time period 1999–2014. We excluded electives based in other countries or electives designed for third or fourth year students. Data abstracted included the topic of the elective, qualitative descriptions of the electives, and any associated surveys or exam data associated with the electives. Data were synthesized using descriptive tables sorting electives by broad topic. Reported outcomes and statistical methods were analyzed to assess study quality.ResultsWe found a wide range of subjects taught in the form of preclinical medical school electives. We identified electives in clinical skills, the humanities, student lifestyle, specialty-specific electives, and an assortment of other miscellaneous electives. Surveys and exams administered to students showed that the electives were universally well received by students. Of the 37 electives identified, 15 electives used quantitative objective assessments, such as knowledge exams, while the remaining tended to use student self-reported results.ConclusionsPreclinical medical student electives are prevalent at medical schools across the United States and have a significant impact on medical student education.
These results indicate that coverage of root by sub-pedicle acellular dermal matrix allografts or subepithelial connective tissue autografts is a very predictable procedure which is stable for 2 years postoperatively. However, subepithelial connective tissue autografts resulted in significant increases in defect coverage, keratinized gingival gain, attachment gain, and residual probing depth.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.