The purpose of the current study was to assess knowledge and attitudes about human papillomavirus (HPV) and HPV vaccination for oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) prevention in first-year through fourth-year dental students. Methods: In this cross-sectional quantitative study, surveys assessed knowledge and attitudes about HPV, HPV-related OPC, and HPV vaccination of incoming first-year dental students (D1), outgoing first- and second-year dental students (D1–D2), and outgoing third- and fourth-year dental students (D3–D4). After completing a 40-item pre-training knowledge and attitude assessment survey, a one-time, one-hour national HPV training session was conducted. An 8-item attitudinal post-survey was completed after training. Results: Of 173 participants (75.9% response rate), over 85% did not know that the rate of HPV is not highest among women in their 30s, and only 11% to 28% knew that smoking-associated OPC is more deadly than HPV-associated OPC. While participants overall expressed willingness to administer the HPV vaccine, the willingness of dental students to do so in their future practice tapered off progressively through dental school year categories (p < 0.001). Among outgoing D1–D4 students, the one-hour HPV training increased participants’ self-perceived ability to describe the burden of HPV disease, discuss the importance of HPV vaccination for cancer prevention, and provide needed HPV vaccination information to parents (all p ≤ 0.004). Conclusions: Understanding deficits in dental student knowledge and attitudes across the 4 years of dental school may help dental educators better understand the timing and content needed for effective HPV training in the dental school curriculum to reduce HPV-associated OPC prevalence.

Unaccompanied migrant minors are increasingly seeking asylum status in the United States (U.S.) where guidelines for age assessment call for the use of multiple forms of evidence. A commonly used approach in the U.S. is dental radiographs to assess the root development of third molars. Not only has research shown this methodology to be unreliable and imprecise, but the evidence has shown significant variability in dental development by chronologic age, race/ethnicity, sex, socioeconomic status, systemic disease, nutritional health, and other environmental factors. Misclassification of minors as adults based upon the imprecise tool of dental age assessment can have serious and harmful consequences. In the U.S., this misclassification has resulted in the housing of minors with adults in Immigrant and Custom Enforcement (ICE) operated jails. In addition, there are significant ethical concerns with regard to the use of radiographs for purposes that are neither diagnostic nor therapeutic and the lack of informed consent. In this commentary we review the (1) inadequacy of dental radiographs as a means of chronologic age assessment for minors, and (2) the ethical implications of implementing this flawed and inappropriate assessment on a highly vulnerable population.