Implant Overdentures and Nutrition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a randomized clinical trial to determine whether providing simple mandibular implant overdentures (IODs) to elderly individuals would give them a significantly better nutritional profile than those who receive complete dentures (CDs). Two hundred fifty-five edentate patients > 65 yrs were randomly assigned to receive maxillary CDs and mandibular IODs (n = 128) or CDs (n = 127). Six-month and one-year post-treatment outcomes were blood plasma levels of homocysteine (tHcy), vitamin B12, vitamin B6, albumin, serum folate, and C-reactive protein concentrations, as well as dietary intake. The association between treatment and tHcy levels was not statistically significant. A decline of folate from baseline values in both study groups, as well as those of vitamins B6 and B12 and albumin, was observed. Significant between-group differences were detected in food preparation and in the individuals' ability to chew a variety of foods. This study suggests that implant overdentures do not have a more positive effect on the nutritional state of elderly edentate individuals at 6 and 12 mos post-treatment than new complete dentures. However, those wearing IODs are significantly more likely to take in their nutrients through fresh, whole fruits and vegetables.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".