Journal of Oral Health Sciences and Dentistry
Research Article Volume: 1 & Issue: 2
Journal Menu
- Home
- Aims and Scope
- Author Guidelines
- Editorial Board
- Reviewer Board
- Current Issue
- Archive
- Journal Contact
Indexed & Abstracted In
Abstract
Background: Oral mucosal lesions may present diagnostic challenges to practicing dentists, particularly when clinical findings are unfamiliar or potentially suspicious. Online learning and evidence-based information seeking may support continuing professional development and clinical decision-making.
Objective: To assess online learning behavior, evidence-seeking practices, confidence in oral pathology-related decisions, and responses to clinically relevant oral lesion scenarios among practicing dentists.
Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire comprising 22 items was organized into six domains: demographic characteristics, oral pathology experience, online learning, evidence-based practice, clinical decision-making, and two clinical scenarios. Data were collected electronically using Google Forms from the end of December 2025 through mid-June 2026, and 460 respondents were included. Data were summarized using frequencies and percentages. Associations between categorical variables were examined using Pearson’s chisquare test, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.
Results: Of 460 respondents, 254 (55.2%) were female and 149 (32.4%) were aged 25–34 years. BDS/DDS was the most common qualification (208, 45.2%). PubMed/Google Scholar was the leading online resource (158, 34.3%), and lack of time was the most frequently reported barrier (169, 36.7%). Most respondents reported using online learning at least weekly (287, 62.4%) and searching the scientific literature often or very often (288, 62.6%). For a persistent non-healing tongue ulcer, 322 (70.0%) selected urgent biopsy/referral. For an unfamiliar oral lesion, 326 (70.9%) selected searching reliable scientific literature/guidelines. Highest qualification was significantly associated with primary evidence source (χ²=30.75, df=12, p=0.002), and online learning frequency was significantly associated with scientific literature-searching frequency (χ²=21.73, df=12, p=0.041).
Conclusion: The findings indicate substantial use of digital and scientific information resources among practicing dentists, but time constraints and difficulties judging information quality remain important barriers. Continuing education should emphasize efficient evidence retrieval, critical appraisal, recognition of red-flag oral lesions, and appropriate biopsy/referral pathways.
Keywords: oral pathology; oral lesions; evidence-based dentistry; online learning; continuing dental education; clinical decision-making; dentists.
AUTHOR TESTIMONIALS
Trusted by Researchers
Experiences from authors who have published with SCIVOLVE.
I had a very positive experience working with the Journal of Case Reports and Reviews in Medicine. The publication process was quick and well organized, every step was clearly explained, and the editorial team was always responsive and helpful.
I really enjoyed communicating with the editorial staff. The editorial team provided clear and efficient communication throughout the process. The manuscript submission process was straightforward, and the editorial team made it easy to address the necessary corrections. I appreciated the professional, patient, and supportive approach of the editorial staff, which has encouraged me to consider publishing my future work.
I had an excellent experience publishing my manuscript with the journal. The communication with the editorial team was clear, professional, and efficient throughout the entire publication process. I truly appreciated their support and responsiveness.
As I pursue a Doctor of Juridical Science degree, I am pleased to have worked with Scivolve Publishers on publishing my article on allergies. In my work to advance women’s human rights and help humanity, it is vital to have publishing opportunities that respect research integrity. From the first contact with the Editorial Manager to the final stage, the process was precise, transparent, and exemplary. Nothing was overpromised, and the handling of sources and references was also excellent. I warmly recommend Scivolve Publishers for their integrity, professionalism, and the respect with which they conduct their work.
From submission to final publication, the process was organized and easy to follow. The editorial communication made the overall experience straightforward and professional.