Comparison of dental education and professional development between mainland China and North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different educational and professional developments within the dental field create different sets of missions, norms, and practices regarding dental diseases and their appropriate treatment. This review has addressed differences in dental education and professional development between mainland China and North America. Many factors influence the choice of model and it is very difficult to predict which model will become predominant. However, there is growing sentiment that the independent faculty model in North America is logical and superior to the model, which 'integrates' dental and medical education in mainland China. Many North America dental schools place a high priority on preclinical and clinical training in the curriculum in order to expose students to patient oral health needs and systemic dental problems much earlier than in mainland China. North America dental schools promote and embrace students self-learning skills by the use of PBL, CRL, and TRAD education methodologies and new e-based technologies and approaches whereby students learn rather than are taught. In mainland China, the traditional lecture-based format is still employed in the majority of dental schools; however, strategies to enhance students self-learning skills is increasingly utilised in most well-known Chinese dental schools. The Chinese dental education model, which treats dentistry as a sub-specialty of medicine, has brought about fundamental differences, with the dentist functioning essentially as a stomatologist. For example, China has built up a large oral and maxillofacial surgery society, and craniofacial surgery is performed to a much broader extent by Chinese dentists than by most North American counterparts. In North America, dentists engage in full-time work, attend continuing training/education programmes, belong to an association, gain legal status, and construct a code of ethics emphasising the quality of care delivered to the public. Currently, continuing dental education in North America is available through a variety of venues involving licensing authorities, universities and private programmes. The concept of professional development in mainland China is relatively new and is still considered primarily in the context of promotion or achieving a higher professional title. Mandatory continuing dental professional education requirements do not guarantee the competence of members of the profession. Today, the Chinese government and society place increasing emphasis upon the accountability of self-regulating professions. Rather than attempting to summarise the current scope of dental education and professional development between mainland China and North America, this paper hopes to enhance mutual understanding, and promote greater academic exchanges in dental education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".