P Nieminen1, J I Virtanen2,3. 1. Medical Informatics and Statistics Group, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland. 2. Research Unit of Oral Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland. 3. Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: One of the core skills of competent dentist is the ability to search and analyse high-quality evidence. Problems in understanding the basic aspects of knowledge-based information may impede its implementation into clinical practice. We examined how Finnish dental students acquire scientific information and how familiar they are with methods for evaluating scientific evidence related to clinical questions. METHODS: All fifth-year dental students (n = 120) at the three universities in Finland received a self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: The three most commonly used sources of information were colleagues, the commercial Health Gate Portal for dental practitioners and personal lecture notes. Although students rarely read scientific journals, they did find that they possess at least passable or even good skills in literature retrieval. Three questions related to the appraisal of evidence in dentistry revealed that students' knowledge of evidence-based dentistry was inadequate to critically evaluate clinical research findings. CONCLUSION: Most students seem to lack knowledge of key methodological evidence-based terms. The present curricula in dental schools fail to encourage the students to search and acquire knowledge wider than their patients themselves do. Universities have the responsibility to teach dentists various methods of critical appraisal to cope with scientific information.
BACKGROUND: One of the core skills of competent dentist is the ability to search and analyse high-quality evidence. Problems in understanding the basic aspects of knowledge-based information may impede its implementation into clinical practice. We examined how Finnish dental students acquire scientific information and how familiar they are with methods for evaluating scientific evidence related to clinical questions. METHODS: All fifth-year dental students (n = 120) at the three universities in Finland received a self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: The three most commonly used sources of information were colleagues, the commercial Health Gate Portal for dental practitioners and personal lecture notes. Although students rarely read scientific journals, they did find that they possess at least passable or even good skills in literature retrieval. Three questions related to the appraisal of evidence in dentistry revealed that students' knowledge of evidence-based dentistry was inadequate to critically evaluate clinical research findings. CONCLUSION: Most students seem to lack knowledge of key methodological evidence-based terms. The present curricula in dental schools fail to encourage the students to search and acquire knowledge wider than their patients themselves do. Universities have the responsibility to teach dentists various methods of critical appraisal to cope with scientific information.