MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Prostheses Removal for Suture Removal after Immediate Load: Success of Implants

2009· article· en· W1977973194 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ana Flávia Sanches Borges, Luís Antônio Violin Dias Pereira, Geninho Thomé, Ana Cláudia Moreira Melo, Ivete Aparecida de Mattias Sartori

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImplantProsthesisFibrous jointDentistrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The aim of this cohort study was to evaluate the success of implants after immediate loading in cases when the prostheses were removed for suture removal on the tenth day following implant placement. We describe a technique for fabricating effective definitive prostheses passively fitted to facilitate immediate load in edentulous patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-one patients with resin-metal prostheses installed within less than 48 hours after implant placement were recalled. Patients for whom various amounts of time had elapsed since implant placement returned for follow-up. Time elapsed ranged from 6 months to 7 years. Stability of the implants was tested after prosthesis removal by horizontal and vertical percussion tests. Implant success was determined as the number of functional implants displaying no mobility. RESULTS: Follow-up revealed that all implants from each period evaluated were stable, with no mobility (100% of implants success), except for the 1-year time point (99.5%) and the 2-year time point (98.9%). No signs of inflammation and/or bleeding were observed. CONCLUSION: Prosthesis removal for suture removal on the tenth day after implant placement represents a reliable and predictable procedure that did not jeopardize implant stability during bone remodeling.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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