Impact of internet supported dental education: Initial outcomes in a study sample

The aim of this preliminary mixed method study was to understand dental students’ thoughts on internet supported learning environment (ISLE) and to investigate its’ impact on their academic success. The research was designed to enroll the students from the 7th semester of School of Dentistry. The lecturer taught dental students for four hours (within four weeks) on the topics of "anamnesis, extraoral and intraoral examination". Voluntary twenty-four students participated actively to the ISLE. During the evaluation phase, data were collected by using open-ended questionnaire, instructor’s observation, students’ evaluation forms and exam results. According to the Open-ended questionnaire, 90% of the participating students mentioned e-learning experience positively affected their success; 55% of the students stated that dental courses can be taught online. According to students’ evaluation form, the highest mean score was granted to the instructor of the course (4.6/5), followed by the learning environment (4.1/5) and the materials (3.7/5). There was a significant difference between the grades granted to the instructor and materials; students thought the instructor was more important than the teaching materials (p<0.05). It was concluded that ISLE supported by PBL increased the students’ satisfaction, positive learning environment and academic success

Global research trends in complex oral sensitivity disorder: A systematic bibliometric analysis of the structures of knowledge

A systematic bibliometric analysis of the structure of knowledge was performed to investigate the co-word analysis, the co-citation analysis, and the social network analysis regarding complex oral sensitivity disorder (COSD)

World Workshop in Oral Medicine VII: reporting of IMMPACT-recommended outcome domains in randomized controlled trials of burning mouth syndrome: a systematic review

Objectives: To determine the frequency of use of the core outcome domains published by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) in burning mouth syndrome (BMS) randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: This systematic review, conducted as part of the World Workshop on Oral Medicine VII (WWOM VII), was performed by searching the literature for studies published in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database/Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar from January 1994 (when the first BMS definition came out) through October 2017. Results: A total of 36 RCTs (n = 2,175 study participants) were included and analyzed. The overall reporting of the IMMPACT core and supplemental outcome domains was low even after the publication of the IMMPACT consensus papers in 2003 and 2005 (mean before IMMPACT consensus publication = 2.6 out of 6; mean after IMMPACT publication = 3.8 out of 6). Use of validated assessment tools recommended by the IMMPACT consensus was scarce (1.9 out of 6). None of the RCTs reviewed cited the IMMPACT consensus papers. Conclusions: The underreporting of IMMPACT outcome domains in BMS RCTs is significant. Raising awareness regarding the existence of standardized outcome domains in chronic pain research is essential to ensure more accurate, comparable, and consistent interpretation of RCT findings that can be clinically translatable

World Workshop on Oral Medicine VII: Burning Mouth Syndrome: A Systematic Review of Disease Definitions and Diagnostic Criteria Utilized in Randomized Clinical Trials

To conduct a systematic review analyzing disease definitions and diagnostic criteria used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving burning mouth syndrome (BMS)

Research routes on awake bruxism metrics:Implications of the updated bruxism definition and evaluation strategies

Background: With time, due to the poor knowledge on it epidemiology, the need to focus on awake bruxism as a complement of sleep studies emerged. Objective: In line with a similar recent proposal for sleep bruxism (SB), defining clinically oriented research routes to implement knowledge on awake bruxism (AB) metrics is important for an enhanced comprehension of the full bruxism spectrum, that is better assessment and more efficient management. Methods: We summarised current strategies for AB assessment and proposed a research route for improving its metrics. Results: Most of the literature focuses on bruxism in general or SB in particular, whilst knowledge on AB is generally fragmental. Assessment can be based on non-instrumental or instrumental approaches. The former include self-report (questionnaires, oral history) and clinical examination, whilst the latter include electromyography (EMG) of jaw muscles during wakefulness as well as the technology-enhanced ecological momentary assesment (EMA). Phenotyping of different AB activities should be the target of a research task force. In the absence of available data on the frequency and intensity of wake-time bruxism-type masticatory muscle activity, any speculation about the identification of thresholds and criteria to identify bruxers is premature. Research routes in the field must focus on the improvement of data reliability and validity. Conclusions: Probing deeper into the study of AB metrics is a fundamental step to assist clinicians in preventing and managing the putative consequences at the individual level. The present manuscript proposes some possible research routes to advance current knowledge. At different levels, instrumentally based and subject-based information must be gathered in a universally accepted standardised approach.</p

Consensus agreement to rename burning mouth syndrome and improve ICD-11 disease criteria

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) proposes revisions in the nomenclature, disease definition, and diagnostic criteria for “burning mouth syndrome” (BMS). This process could benefit from additional systematically collected expert input. Thus, the purpose of this study was to use the Delphi method to (1) determine whether revision in nomenclature and alternative names for “BMS” are warranted and (2) identify areas of consensus among experts for changes to the disease description and proposed diagnostic criteria of “BMS,” as described in the ICD-11 (World Health Organization). From 31 international invited experts, 23 who expressed interest were sent the survey. The study used 4 iterative surveys, each with a response rate of ≥82%. Consensus was predefined as 70% of participants in agreement. Data were summarized using both descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis. Consensus indicated that BMS should not be classified as a syndrome and recommended instead renaming to “burning mouth disorder.” Consensus included deletion of 2 diagnostic criteria: (1) emotional distress or functional disability and (2) the number of hours symptoms occur per day. Additional items that reached consensus clarified the disease definition and proposed more separate diagnostic criteria, including a list of local and systemic factors to evaluate as potential secondary causes of oral burning. Experts in this study recommended and came to consensus on select revisions to the proposed ICD-11 BMS nomenclature, diagnostic criteria, and disease definition. The revisions recommended have the potential to improve clarity, consistency, and accuracy of diagnosis for this disorder

Consensus agreement to rename burning mouth syndrome and improve International Classification of Diseases-11 disease criteria:an international Delphi study

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) proposes revisions in the nomenclature, disease definition, and diagnostic criteria for “burning mouth syndrome” (BMS). This process could benefit from additional systematically collected expert input. Thus, the purpose of this study was to use the Delphi method to (1) determine whether revision in nomenclature and alternative names for “BMS” are warranted and (2) identify areas of consensus among experts for changes to the disease description and proposed diagnostic criteria of “BMS,” as described in the ICD-11 (World Health Organization). From 31 international invited experts, 23 who expressed interest were sent the survey. The study used 4 iterative surveys, each with a response rate of ≥82%. Consensus was predefined as 70% of participants in agreement. Data were summarized using both descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis. Consensus indicated that BMS should not be classified as a syndrome and recommended instead renaming to “burning mouth disorder.” Consensus included deletion of 2 diagnostic criteria: (1) emotional distress or functional disability and (2) the number of hours symptoms occur per day. Additional items that reached consensus clarified the disease definition and proposed more separate diagnostic criteria, including a list of local and systemic factors to evaluate as potential secondary causes of oral burning. Experts in this study recommended and came to consensus on select revisions to the proposed ICD-11 BMS nomenclature, diagnostic criteria, and disease definition. The revisions recommended have the potential to improve clarity, consistency, and accuracy of diagnosis for this disorder

Reply to Currie et al.

[Extract] We would like to thank Currie et al.3 for initiating a discussion on our recent publication to rename and improve the International Classification of Diseases-11 disease criteria for burning mouth syndrome.4 In this article, we presented the results of a consensus reached by an international group of experts using the Delphi methodology.2 As Currie et al. pointed out, there are many overlapping and complementary aspects between the betaversion of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Burning Mouth Syndrome (RDC/BMS) and our work, strengthening and increasing the validity of each.2–4 We agree with most of what Currie et al. have written in their letter.3 However, regarding nomenclature, we would like to encourage using the term burning mouth disorder in the beta version of the RDC/BMS until there is additional evidence for the cause(s) of oral burning symptoms at which time an ontological approach to the name may be substituted. In our previous publication, our team also highlighted a number of reasons why the word syndrome could be replaced with the word disorder.6 The adoption of the term temporomandibular disorders and creation of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMDs) is not without ontological flaws, as noted by Ceusters et al.1 However, it has provided a standardized nomenclature and robust framework for research into the etiology, pathophysiology, classification, and treatment of the disorders.8 By using the term burning mouth disorder, the beta version of the RDC/BMS could serve as a model framework for future research