Comparative Evaluation of Changes in Brain Activity and Cognitive Function of Edentulous Patients, with Dentures and Two‐Implant Supported Mandibular Overdenture‐Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relationship between brain and prosthesis was previously assessed either by improving denture function or in fixed implant retained, wherein brain function was assessed only after crown placement. PURPOSE: To prospectively analyze the changes in brain activity and cognitive function of completely edentulous patients in edentulous state, with dentures and two-implant supported mandibular overdenture before and after loading, along with the effect of mastication in the change - a pilot study. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Ten completely edentulous (CE) non-denture wearers were selected. The mandibular prosthesis was loaded with two 3.3 mm × 13 mm myriad snap fit implants. To assess the brain activity and cognitive function, Electroencephalogram (Neurofax EEG 1000 Ver 05-90, Nihon Kohden corporation, Tokyo, Japan) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) questionnaire, respectively, were taken during the process of rehabilitation. EEG assessment was analyzed using Matlab 2011A 7.9 signal processing tool box. The results were statistically analyzed with SPSS 17.0 version using Wilcoxon signed rank and Friedman test RESULTS: Amplitude, power of alpha waves and cognitive scores increased gradually with highest mean rank for implant supported overdenture (IOD). The bivariate analysis between two groups showed there was significant difference between all the groups (p < 0.05) except for groups CE-I (completely edentulous - implant placement) and CD- I (complete denture insertion - implant placement) in amplitude of alpha waves while in group CD-I with respect to power of alpha waves. MMSE revealed the mean of cognitive scores in Complete Edentulous was 17.40, Complete Denture was 18.30 and finally with Implant Overdenture was 23.80. CONCLUSION: The present study has enlightened the significance of two implant supported mandibular overdenture in improving the mental state of an individual and that the enhancement was due to functional improvement with prosthesis when loaded with implants and not due to mere existence of implant without any function.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".