| Title |
Training Pathways in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Across the Globe—A Mini Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12663-017-1020-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sanjeev Kumar |
| Abstract |
Due to historical reasons, many different training pathways exist across countries that lead to a degree in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Although it is generally accepted to be a specialty of dentistry, the complex nature of procedures being performed by OMF surgeons today, has necessitated extensive general surgical training. Many countries have thus made dual qualification mandatory, while others have extended training programs in OMFS with integrated medical teaching. In India, frequent contact with foriegn experts, availability of world-class equipment and efforts of individual surgeons has ensured that the full scope of OMFS is practised in select centres of learning. However, the MDS curriculum dictated by DCI has not conformed to the requirements of the specialty as practiced today. This brief mini-review of the various training pathways aims at comparing our system with other countries and attempts to draw lessons which could help improve future OMFS training in India. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 12% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 9% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 24% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 61% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 April 2020.
All research outputs
#14,808,701
of 25,416,581 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
#103
of 290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,924
of 330,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,416,581 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 290 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,334 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them