In North America, all dental schools have adopted some form of community-based dental education (CBDE) or service-learning, but little is known about the areas being researched and reported in published studies. The aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review to determine what areas of research had been conducted to determine the effects of CBDE on dental students' readiness to treat populations that are underserved. A systematic search of articles published in English or French since 2000 was performed on July 29, 2015, and combined quantitative and qualitative synthesis of data was conducted. Of the 32 studies evaluated, 23 (72%) were quantitative, seven (22%) were qualitative, and two were multi-method. The majority (66%) used self-report methods, most frequently surveys. Participants in 50% of the studies were fourth-year dental students; the others assessed third- and fourth-year (13%), first- and second-year (6%), and first-year (13%) students. Dentists were the participants in three studies (9%), with dentists and students in one study (3%). Either the types of populations receiving care were unspecified or four or more groups were pooled together in 25 studies (78%), while two focused on children, one on rural populations, one on elderly populations, two on persons with special health care needs, and one on low-income populations. The study areas were wide-ranging, but generally fell into three categories: student performance (37.5%), teaching approaches and evaluation methods (37.5%), and perceptions of CBDE (25%). This review identified many research gaps for determining whether students are prepared to treat populations that are underserved. The disparate nature of CBDE research demonstrates a compelling argument for determining elements that define student readiness to care for patients who are underserved and for research that includes the voices of patients, curriculum development, and more comprehensive and rigorous evaluation methodologies.
This scoping review maps a wide array of literature to identify academic programs that have been developed to enhance oral health care for rural and remote populations and to provide an overview of their outcomes. Arksey and O’Malley’s 5-stage scoping review framework has steered this review. We conducted a literature search with defined eligibility criteria through electronic databases, websites of academic records, professional and rural oral health care organizations as well as grey literature spanning the time interval from the late 1960s to May 2017. The charted data was classified, analyzed and reported using a thematic approach. A total of 72 citations (67 publications and seven websites) were selected for the final review. The review identified 62 universities with program initiatives towards improving access to oral health care in rural and remote communities. These initiatives were classified into three categories: training and education of dental and allied health students and professionals, education and training of rural and remote community members and oral health care services. The programs were successful in terms of dental students’ positive perception about rural practice and their enhanced competencies, students’ increased adoption of rural practices, non-dental health care providers’ improved oral health knowledge and self-efficacy, rural oral health and oral health services’ improvement, as well as cost-effectiveness compared to other strategies. The results of our review suggest that these innovative programs were effective in improving access to oral health care in rural and remote regions and may serve as models for other academic institutions that have not yet implemented such programs.
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.