Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

U.S. Maxillofacial Prosthetics Programs: Fellows' and Directors' Perspectives.

James L Sheets1, Daniel J Pinkston1, Judy Chia-Chun Yuan1

  • 1James L. Sheets, DDS, FACP, is Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Creighton University; Daniel J. Pinkston, DDS, is a former Resident, Advanced Education in Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Illinois at Chicago; Judy Chia-Chun Yuan, DDS, MS, FACP, is Associate Professor and Predoctoral Implant Program Director, Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Illinois at Chicago; Cortino Sukotjo, DDS, MMSc, PhD, FACP, is Associate Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Illinois at Chicago; and Alvin G. Wee, BDS, DDS, MS, MPH, PhD, is a Maxillofacial Prosthodontist, Veterans Affairs Nebraska Western Iowa Health Care System, Omaha, Nebraska and Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Creighton University.

Journal of Dental Education
|December 4, 2018
PubMed
Summary

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Response to the Letter to the Editor, "Comment on 'Readability and performance of AI chatbot responses to frequently asked questions in maxillofacial prosthodontics'".

The Journal of prosthetic dentistry·2026
Same author

From clinics to communities: a scoping review of interprofessional service-learning in undergraduate dental education.

BMC medical education·2026
Same author

Exploring the impact of immersive reality for enhancing clinical training in dental education: a systematic review.

BMC medical education·2026
Same author

Machine Learning Methods to Predict the Academic Performance of Pre-Clinical Dental Students Based on Pre-University Information.

International journal of dentistry·2026
Same author

Comparison of Objective Structured Clinical Examination Preparation and Performance Between Foreign-Trained Dentists and Domestic Dental Students.

Journal of dental education·2026
Same author

Evaluating the performance of large language models versus prosthodontic residents on the 2024 and 2025 National Prosthodontic Resident Examination.

The Journal of prosthetic dentistry·2026

Maxillofacial prosthetics (MFP) program directors prioritize interviews and recommendations for selecting fellows. Fellows, however, prioritize location, treatment variety, and clinical education when choosing an MFP program.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Specialties
  • Prosthodontics
  • Surgical & Medical Procedures

Background:

  • Maxillofacial prosthetics (MFP) fellowship programs have limited positions.
  • Understanding selection criteria is vital for both applicants and programs.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To survey MFP fellows on factors influencing their program choice.
  • To survey MFP directors on critical factors in fellow selection.

Main Methods:

  • Surveys were distributed to all eight U.S. MFP program directors and 13 fellows in June 2015.
  • Directors were surveyed on selection processes; fellows on program choice factors.
  • Response rates were 87.5% for directors (N=7) and 53.8% for fellows (N=7).

Main Results:

Keywords:
advanced dental educationmaxillofacial prostheticsmaxillofacial prosthodonticsprosthodontics

Related Experiment Videos

  • Directors deemed the interview process most critical, followed by letters of recommendation, personal statements, and grades.
  • Fellows prioritized program location, treatment diversity, patient volume, and clinical education.

Conclusions:

  • A discrepancy exists between director selection priorities and fellow program choice factors.
  • This information can aid MFP programs and fellows in program development and selection.