Publishing in a subscription based journal Accepted (peer-reviewed) VersionThe accepted version of an article is the version that incorporates all amendments made during the peer review process, but prior to the final published version (the Version of Record, which includes; copy and stylistic edits, online and print formatting, citation and other linking, deposit in abstracting and indexing services, and the addition of bibliographic and other material.Self-archiving of the accepted version is subject to an embargo period of 12-24 months. The embargo period is 12 months for scientific, technical, and medical (STM) journals and 24 months for social science and humanities (SSH) journals following publication of the final article.• the author's personal website • the author's company/institutional repository or archive • not for profit subject-based repositories such as PubMed Central Articles may be deposited into repositories on acceptance, but access to the article is subject to the embargo period. The version posted may not be updated or replaced with the final published version (the Version of Record). Authors may transmit, print and share copies of the accepted version with colleagues, provided that there is no systematic distribution, e.g. a posting on a listserve, network or automated delivery.There is no obligation upon authors to remove preprints posted to not for profit preprint servers prior to submission. June 2017 Accepted ArticleThis article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/adj.12370 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. Accepted ArticleThis article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. Ethical considerationsThe study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Adelaide and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was conducted as a mailed self-complete survey; consent was implied through the return of completed surveys. Accepted ArticleThis article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. Conflict of interestNone declared. AbstractBackground: Migrants occupy a significant proportion of the dental workforce in Australia.

As we debate shaping the future oral health workforce within the UK, to meet the needs of current and future populations, it is helpful to take an international perspective on this very important issue. Globally, there is a strong recognition that human resources for health (HRH) are fundamentally important to deliver effective care, accessible to all people. This paper reviews the outcome of the fourth global forum held by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in Dublin which highlighted the urgency for action. The main objectives of the forum were to advance the implementation of (i) the WHO Global Strategy on HRH 2030 and (ii) the United Nations High-Level Commission's Health Employment and Economic Growth recommendations. From an oral health perspective, the global burden of oral disease remains huge with untreated dental caries, periodontal disease and tooth loss ranking among the most prevalent conditions worldwide. Major considerations are how dental education, practice delivery and/or oral health systems as a whole could and should innovate to accommodate the growing needs of the population. As dental professionals, it also becomes necessary for us to engage and play a proactive role in this change process. Due to growing differences between population needs and available services, it is necessary for oral health personnel to work more closely with the broader health workforce so as to identify solutions that are in the best interests of the patients and populations at large.