The global distribution of oral and maxillofacial surgeons: a mixed-methods study.

Despite its role in treating the most dominant non-communicable diseases worldwide, the global workforce of oral and maxillofacial (OM) surgeons is not well-characterized. To address the current deficit in understanding of the global OM surgeon workforce and to elevate oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) in the global health discourse, we join other surgical specialties in evaluating global surgical capacity with a descriptive analysis of the distribution of OM surgeons worldwide. A mixed-methods study was implemented using a combination of literature review, in-country contacts, internet searches, and survey data. The survey was distributed globally from January to June 2022. Data regarding OM surgeon workforce estimates were obtained for 104 of 195 United Nations-recognized countries (53.3%). Among countries with available estimates, the median global workforce density was 0.518 OM surgeons per 100,000 population. Twenty-eight countries (26.9%) were reported to have two or fewer OM surgeons. The median OM surgeon workforce density for low-income countries was 0.015 surgeons per 100,000 population, compared to 1.087 surgeons per 100,000 population in high-income countries. low and middle-income countries countries have the least workforce density as well as the least data coverage. More work is needed to better understand the capacity of the global OM surgeon workforce and access to OMS care.

The number of attentional foci and their precision are dissociated in the posterior parietal cortex.

Many everyday tasks require us to track moving objects with attention. The demand for attention increases both when more targets are tracked and when the targets move faster. These 2 aspects of attention-assigning multiple attentional foci (or indices) to targets and monitoring each focus with precision-may tap into different cognitive and brain mechanisms. In this study, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to quantify the response profile of dorsal attentional areas to variations in the number of attentional foci and their spatiotemporal precision. Subjects were asked to track a specific spoke of either 1 or 2 pinwheels that rotated at various speeds. Their tracking performance declined both when more pinwheels were tracked and when the tracked pinwheels rotated faster. However, posterior parietal activity increased only when subjects tracked more pinwheels but remained flat when they tracked faster moving pinwheels. The frontal eye fields and early visual areas increased activity when there were more targets and when the targets rotated faster. These results suggest that the posterior parietal cortex is specifically involved in indexing independently moving targets with attention but not in monitoring each focus with precision.

Number estimation relies on a set of segmented objects.

How do we estimate the number of objects in a set? Two types of visual representations might underlie this ability - an unsegmented visual image or a segmented collection of discrete objects. We manipulated whether individual objects were isolated from each other or grouped into pairs by irrelevant lines. If number estimation operates over an unsegmented image, then this manipulation should not affect estimates. But if number estimation relies on a segmented image, then grouping pairs of objects into single units should lead to lower estimates. In Experiment 1 participants underestimated the number of grouped objects, relative to disconnected objects in which the connecting lines were 'broken'. Experiment 2 presents evidence that this segmentation process occurred broadly across the entire set of objects. In Experiment 3, a staircase procedure provides a quantitative measure of the underestimation effect. Experiment 4 shows that the strength of the grouping effect was equally strong for a single thin line, and the effect can be eliminated by a small break in the line. These results provide direct evidence that number estimation relies on a segmented input.

The capacity of visual short-term memory is set both by visual information load and by number of objects.

Previous research has suggested that visual short-term memory has a fixed capacity of about four objects. However, we found that capacity varied substantially across the five stimulus classes we examined, ranging from 1.6 for shaded cubes to 4.4 for colors (estimated using a change detection task). We also estimated the information load per item in each class, using visual search rate. The changes we measured in memory capacity across classes were almost exactly mirrored by changes in the opposite direction in visual search rate (r2=.992 between search rate and the reciprocal of memory capacity). The greater the information load of each item in a stimulus class (as indicated by a slower search rate), the fewer items from that class one can hold in memory. Extrapolating this linear relationship reveals that there is also an upper bound on capacity of approximately four or five objects. Thus, both the visual information load and number of objects impose capacity limits on visual short-term memory.