Critical thinking skills are essential for the successful dentist, yet few explicit skillsets in critical thinking have been developed and published in peer-reviewed literature. The aims of this article are to 1) offer an assessable critical thinking teaching model with the expert's thought process as the outcome, learning guide, and assessment instrument and 2) offer three critical thinking skillsets following this model: for geriatric risk assessment, technology decision making, and situation analysis/reflections. For the objective component, the student demonstrates delivery of each step in the thought process. For the subjective component, the student is judged to have grasped the principles as applied to the patient or case. This article describes the framework and the results of pilot tests in which students in one year at this school used the model in the three areas, earning scores of 90% or above on the assessments. The model was thus judged to be successful for students to demonstrate critical thinking skillsets in the course settings. Students consistently delivered each step of the thought process and were nearly as consistent in grasping the principles behind each step. As more critical thinking skillsets are implemented, a reinforcing network develops.

The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a learning strategy using critical thinking to teach dental students how to assess the risk of rapid oral health deterioration (ROHD) among elderly patients. A learning guide was developed using risk factors identified in the literature and the steps that expert faculty members apply in their clinical decision making, summarized in a set of ten steps. A new system of labeling risk was developed for the elderly population, which correlates the level of risk with the amount of disease. Participants in the study were all 91 fourth-year dental students in two subsequent classes who took part in a five-week Geriatrics and Special Needs Clinic rotation in the spring of 2015 and 2016. The students were introduced to the ROHD concept and asked to use the guide in a presentation during their rotation. The students were graded on an A, G, or M scale (Applied concept, Grasped and applied concept, or Missed application of concept). Students were also asked to assess their learning experience, and their answers were thematically grouped and analyzed. For eight of the ten steps, at least 93% of the students were graded A or G. The exceptions were the steps about developing a communications plan, which was missed by 23.1%, and self-assessment, which was missed by 30.8%. Interexaminer agreement on students' applying (A + G grades) versus missing the step was moderate or high on six of ten items. Nearly all the students (98.7%) considered assessing the risk of ROHD an important or very important skill. In this study, a learning strategy to teach dental students how to assess the risk of ROHD among elderly patients was developed and successfully implemented.

Although dental defects have long been observed among surviving pre-term infants, only few systematic studies address this problem. In a clinic limited to recall of infants of very low birthweight (less than 1.5 kg), enamel hypoplasia of primary incisors was found in 14/67 (21%) children, and enamel opacities were found in an additional 31% of the children. In contrast, enamel hypoplasia and opacities were found in 4% and 22%, respectively, of a control group of 46 normal birthweight children. The difference was significant (p less than 0.05) for the hypoplasia but not for the opacities. Primary incisor enamel hypoplasia was more commonly noted in maxillary central incisors than in lateral incisors (X2 = 28.0, p less than 0.01). Furthermore, hypoplasia was more common in maxillary incisors than in mandibular incisors (X2 = 48.4, p less than 0.01). In infants with dental defects, there was no significant correlation with pregnancy risk factors, gestational age, birthweight, septicemia, first-week caloric intake, serum bilirubin, or calcium. Infants with enamel hypoplasia were more likely, however, to have severe respiratory distress syndrome (X2 = 7.2, p less than 0.01), than infants with unaltered enamel. Central incisor edge involvement may indicate post-natal processes and/or a systemic disturbance extending back to the middle trimester of pregnancy.

Patient-centered care involves an inseparable set of knowledge, abilities, and professional traits on the part of the health care provider. For practical reasons, health professions education is segmented into disciplines or domains like knowledge, technical skills, and critical thinking, and the culture of dental education is weighted toward knowledge and technical skills. Critical thinking, however, has become a growing presence in dental curricula. To guide student learning and assess performance in critical thinking, guidelines have been developed over the past several decades in the educational literature. Prominent among these guidelines are the following: engage the student in multiple situations/exercises relecting critical thinking; for each exercise, emulate the intended activity for validity; gain agreement of faculty members across disciplines and curriculum years on the learning construct, application, and performance assessment protocol for reliability; and use the same instrument to guide learning and assess performance. The purposes of this article are 1) to offer a set of concepts from the education literature potentially helpful to guide program design or corroborate existing programs in dental education; 2) to offer an implementation model consolidating these concepts as a guide for program design and execution; 3) to cite speciic examples of exercises and programs in critical thinking in the dental education literature analyzed against these concepts; and 4) to discuss opportunities and challenges in guiding student learning and assessing performance in critical thinking for dentistry.

To be able to meet the demands for care in 2040, dental graduates will need to address challenges resulting from the rapidly changing health care environment with knowledge and sets of skills to build on current standards and adapt to the future. The purposes of this article are to 1) analyze key challenges likely to evolve considerably between now and 2040 that will impact dental education and practice and 2) propose several sets of skills and educational outcomes necessary to address these challenges. The challenges discussed include changes in prevalence of oral diseases, dental practice patterns, materials and technologies, integrated medical-dental care, role of electronic health records, cultural competence, integrated curricula, interprofessional education, specialty-general balance, and web/cloud-based collaborations. To meet these challenges, the dental graduate will need skills such as core knowledge in basic and clinical dentistry, technical proficiency, critical thinking skills for lifelong learning, ethical and professional values, ability to manage a practice, social responsibility, and ability to function in a collegial intra- and interprofessional setting. Beyond the skills of the individual dentist will be the need for leadership in academia and the practice community. Academic and professional leaders will need to engage key constituencies to develop strategic directions and agendas with all parties pointed toward high standards for individual patients and the public at large. This article was written as part of the project "Advancing Dental Education in the 21 Century."

An evidence‐based (EB) approach has been a significant driver in reforming healthcare over the past two decades. This change has extended across a broad range of health professions, including oral healthcare. A key element in achieving an EB approach to oral healthcare is educating our practitioners, both current and future. This involves providing opportunities integrated within simulated and actual clinical settings for practitioners to learn and apply the principles and processes of evidence‐based oral healthcare (EBOHC). Therefore, the focus of this discussion will be on ways in which EBOHC and associated research activities can be implemented into curricula, with the aim of improving patient care. This paper will initially define the scope of EBOHC and research, what these involve, why they are important, and issues that we need to manage when implementing EBOHC. This will be followed by a discussion of factors that enable successful implementation of EBOHC and research into curricula. The paper concludes with suggestions on the future of EBOHC and research in curricula. Key recommendations related to curricula include strengthening of the culture of a scientific approach to education and oral healthcare provision; complete integration of EBOHC into the curriculum at all levels; and faculty development to implement EBOHC based on their needs and evidence of effective approaches. Key recommendations to support implementation and maintenance of EBOHC include recognition and funding for high‐quality systematic reviews and development of associated methodologies relevant for global environments; building global capacity of EBOHC researchers; research into improving translation of effective interventions into education and healthcare practice, including patient‐reported outcomes, safety and harms, understanding and incorporation of patient values into EB decision‐making, economic evaluation research specific to oral healthcare and effective methods for changing practitioner (faculty) behaviours; and extend access to synthesized research in ‘user friendly’ formats and languages tailored to meet users’ needs. Realizing these recommendations may help to improve access to effective healthcare as a basic human right.

The educational application of critical thinking has increased in the last twenty years with programs like problem-based learning. Performance measurement related to the dental student's capacity for critical thinking remains elusive, however. This article offers a model now in use to measure critical thinking applied to patient assessment and treatment planning across the four years of the dental school curriculum and across clinical disciplines. Two elements of the model are described: 1) a critical thinking measurement "cell," and 2) a list of minimally essential steps in critical thinking for patient assessment and treatment planning. Issues pertaining to this model are discussed: adaptations on the path from novice to expert, the role of subjective measurement, variations supportive of the model, and the correlation of individual and institutional assessment. The critical thinking measurement cell consists of interacting performance tasks and measures. The student identifies the step in the process (for example, chief complaint) with objective measurement; the student then applies the step to a patient or case with subjective measurement; the faculty member then combines the objective and subjective measurements into an evaluation on progress toward competence. The activities in the cell are then repeated until all the steps in the process have been addressed. A next task is to determine consistency across the four years and across clinical disciplines.

No abstract