Estimating the Number of Dentists Needed in 2040

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/153584/1/jddjde017021.pd

Dental School and Community Clinic Financial Arrangements

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/153602/1/jddj0022033720117510suppltb05194x.pd

Assessment of the Dental Pipeline Program from the External Reviewers and National Program Office

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/153694/1/jddj002203372009732suppltb04693x.pd

The Macy Study: A Framework for Consensus

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/153659/1/jddj002203372008722suppltb04486x.pd

U.S. State‐Supported Dental Schools: Financial Projections and Implications

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/153620/1/jddj002203372006703tb04080x.pd

U.S. State‐Supported Dental Schools: Financial Projections and Implications

This article examines the impact of financial trends in state‐supported dental schools on full‐time clinical faculty; the diversity of dental students and their career choices; investments in physical facilities; and the place of dentistry in research universities. The findings of our study are the following: the number of students per full‐time clinical faculty member increased; the three schools with the lowest revenue increases lost a third of their full‐time clinical faculty; more students are from wealthier families; most schools are not able to adequately invest in their physical plant; and more than half of schools have substantial NIH‐funded research programs. If current trends continue, the term “crisis” will describe the situation faced by most dental schools. Now is the time to build the political consensus needed to develop new and more effective strategies to educate the next generation of American dentists and to keep dental education primarily based in research universities. The future of the dental profession and the oral health of the American people depend on it.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/153587/1/jddj002203372008722suppltb04487x.pd

Maternal and neonatal outcomes by labor onset type and gestational age.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine maternal and neonatal outcomes by labor onset type and gestational age. STUDY DESIGN: We used electronic medical records data from 10 US institutions in the Consortium on Safe Labor on 115,528 deliveries from 2002 through 2008. Deliveries were divided by labor onset type (spontaneous, elective induction, indicated induction, unlabored cesarean). Neonatal and maternal outcomes were calculated by labor onset type and gestational age. RESULTS: Neonatal intensive care unit admissions and sepsis improved with each week of gestational age until 39 weeks (P \u3c .001). After adjusting for complications, elective induction of labor was associated with a lower risk of ventilator use (odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.53), sepsis (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.26-0.49), and neonatal intensive care unit admissions (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.48-0.57) compared to spontaneous labor. The relative risk of hysterectomy at term was 3.21 (95% CI, 1.08-9.54) with elective induction, 1.16 (95% CI, 0.24-5.58) with indicated induction, and 6.57 (95% CI, 1.78-24.30) with cesarean without labor compared to spontaneous labor. CONCLUSION: Some neonatal outcomes improved until 39 weeks. Babies born with elective induction are associated with better neonatal outcomes compared to spontaneous labor. Elective induction may be associated with an increased hysterectomy risk