The Current Status of the Anatomical Sciences Curriculum in U.S. and Canadian Dental Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anatomical sciences form one of the major building blocks of the basic medical sciences in the professional training of dentists. This paper defines the courses and classifies the formats of teaching for each course within the anatomical sciences curriculum. Information was gathered from the Internet, specifically the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) website links to U.S. and Canadian dental schools and their online catalogues or bulletins as well as online course syllabi. The results demonstrate the distribution of schools in the United States and Canada teaching anatomical sciences in the following categories: stand-alone, sequential, and multifaceted courses for gross anatomy; stand-alone and integrated courses for histology; stand-alone, integrated, incorporated, and no course for neuroanatomy; and stand-alone, incorporated, and no course in embryology. This paper concludes with the proposition that a survey of the usage of anatomical knowledge in use in a typical dental general practice needs to be conducted. The results of such a survey need to be evaluated with the intention of determining what should be taught in a dental clinical anatomical sciences curriculum.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".