Student perspectives on integrating basic and clinical dental sciences: insights from three dental schools in Norway

Background A strong foundation in basic medical sciences is essential for dental education, yet their integration with clinical training remains debated. Traditional curricula often front-load biomedical content in the early years, separated from clinical practice, which may affect student motivation and perceptions of relevance. Norway's three dental schools differ in curricular design, providing an opportunity to explore how structure shapes student experiences. Materials and methods A cross-sectional survey study was conducted by inviting 157 final-year dental students from the University of Oslo (UiO), the University of Bergen (UiB), and UiT The Arctic University of Norway to complete an anonymous online questionnaire. Ninety-eight students responded (57% in Oslo, 59% in Bergen, 75% in Tromsø), of which 94 were included in the final analysis. The questionnaire addressed expectations before admission, timing and integration of biomedical sciences, clinical relevance, and motivational impact. Data were analyzed using ordinal logistic regression and Fisher's exact test, with significance set at p < 0.05. Results Over 80% of students across institutions reported being aware of the importance of biomedical sciences before admission. All three schools concentrated teaching in the first two years, but significant institutional differences emerged regarding integration in later years ( p < 0.001). At UiO, 70% reported that extensive early teaching negatively affected their motivation, compared with fewer than 20% at UiB and UiT ( p < 0.0001). Similarly, 65% of UiO students disagreed that clinical supervisors reinforced biomedical relevance, while students at UiB and UiT were more likely to report neutral or positive experiences ( p < 0.001). Conclusion Curriculum structure plays an important role in shaping students' motivation and perceptions of biomedical relevance. Programs with limited linkage between preclinical and clinical teaching may hinder students' ability to apply foundational knowledge, whereas earlier integration appears to support stronger engagement. Strengthening vertical integration may therefore enhance both clinical competence and perceived relevance.