MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1737938813 · doi:10.1111/cid.12097

Incidence of Surgery Related to Problems with Peri-Implantitis: A Retrospective Study on Patients Followed Up between 2003 and 2010 at One Specialist Clinic

2013· article· en· W1737938813 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Torsten Jemt, Victoria Gyzander, Anna Örnhall Britse

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeri-implantitisIncidence (geometry)DentistryRetrospective cohort studyRadiographyImplantSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Little knowledge is available on incidence of patients treated for peri-implantitis problems in routine follow-up protocols. PURPOSE: The aim was to report the incidence, and clinical and radiographic characteristics related to routine follow-up patients who are surgically treated for peri-implantitis problems during 8 years of inclusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a history of peri-implantitis surgery were identified from patients examined on routine basis at one clinic (Brånemark clinic) between January 2003 and December 2010. Data on included patients were retrospectively retrieved and reported from dental records and radiographs. RESULTS: On an average, 1,294 patients per year (SD 96) were followed up during inclusion period. Altogether, 134 patients had surgery related to peri-implantitis problems, corresponding to an average of 1.2% of followed-up patients per year. No prosthesis was completely lost, but altogether, 37 implants (6% of included implants) were removed in 34 patients (25%) during these surgical interventions. Peri-implantitis surgery was observed more often in the edentulous upper jaw (p < .05), and there was a tendency that surgery increased by time of follow-up. No significant differences were found between patients provided with machined or medium-rough implant surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of peri-implantitis surgery was on an average 1.2% of followed-up patients per year during an 8 years period of inclusion. As no data were available on patient compliance, it could be assumed that the result may underscore the clinical need. Significantly, more edentulous upper jaws were included compared with other treated jaw situations. Data also indicated that the need for surgery may increase by time of follow-up, but no significant differences were observed between patients provided with machined and medium-rough implant surfaces.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.143
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research→Same topicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→