Knowledge, self-reported clinical practices, and perceived preparedness for early detection of oral potentially malignant disorders and oral cancer among dental students in Poland: an exploratory cross-sectional study

Background Early detection of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) and oral cancer requires knowledge, systematic examination, and appropriate referral. This exploratory study assessed questionnaire-based knowledge, self-reported clinical practices, perceived preparedness, and educational needs among dental students and postgraduate interns in Poland. Methods An online cross-sectional survey used convenience sampling between July and August 2026. Of 200 submitted questionnaires, 40 were excluded and 160 were analyzed. A study-specific exploratory instrument generated knowledge (0–39), self-reported clinical practice (0–16), and self-assessment (0–10) scores. Knowledge-related associations were examined using multivariable linear regression with HC3 robust standard errors. Sensitivity analyses examined alternative knowledge scoring, restriction to the two largest training categories, leave-one-out coefficient stability, and bootstrap estimates. Clinical competence was not objectively assessed. Results The median knowledge score was 34.5 (IQR: 32–36), and 90.0% met the study-defined high-knowledge threshold. Although the median practice index was 14 (IQR: 11.5–14), only 26.9% reported always examining asymptomatic patients and 60.6% reported regional lymph node examination. Lack of clinical experience (71.3%) and diagnostic confidence (69.4%) were the main reported barriers. Overall, 68.1% considered curricular preparation inadequate and 97.5% wanted further education. Combined theoretical and practical/clinical training was associated with higher questionnaire-based knowledge than theoretical training alone ( B = 4.565; 95% CI: 1.964–7.165; p = 0.001). This association persisted with alternative scoring and restriction to the two largest training categories, although some secondary findings depended on scoring. Conclusions Respondents achieved high questionnaire-based knowledge scores while reporting gaps in examination practices and perceived preparedness. The training association does not establish educational effectiveness or objectively demonstrated clinical competence. The findings identify priorities for further evaluation in larger, institutionally characterized samples using validated instruments and objective clinical assessments.