Directions for advancing the study of work transitions in the 21st century

Objectives: The purpose of this article is to share the details, outcomes and deliverables from an international workshop on work transitions in London, Ontario, Canada. Participants: Researchers, graduate students, and community group members met to identity ways to advance the knowledge base of strategies to enhance work participation for those in the most disadvantaged groups within society. Methods: A participatory approach was used in this workshop with presentations by researchers and graduate students. This approach included dialogue and discussion with community members. In addition, small group dialogue and debate, world cafe discussions, written summaries of group discussion and reflection boards were used to bring new ideas to the discussion and to build upon what we know. Findings: Two research imperatives and six research recommendations were identified to advance global dialogue on work transitions and to advance the knowledge base. Occupational justice can be used to support future research directions in the study of work transitions. Conclusions: Moving forward requires a commitment of community of researchers, clinicians and stakeholders to address work disparities and implement solutions to promote participation in work.

Width of buccal and posterior corridors: differences between cases treated with asymmetric and symmetric extractions

OBJECTIVE: To verify if there is difference in the buccal and posterior corridor width in cases treated with extraction of one and four premolars. METHODS: Through posed smile photographs of 23 Class II patients, subdivision, treated with extraction of one premolar and 25 Class I and Class II patients, subdivision, treated with extraction of four premolars, the percentage of buccal and posterior corridor width was calculated. The two protocols of extractions were compared regarding the buccal and posterior corridor width by independent t tests. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference on the buccal and posterior corridor widths between patients treated with symmetric and asymmetric extraction. CONCLUSION: The buccal and posterior corridor did not differ between the evaluated protocols of extractions.