Clinical Assessment of Peri‐Implant Tissues in Patients with Varying Severity of Chronic Periodontitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This retrospective study assessed the health of peri-implant tissues in patients with varying severity of chronic periodontitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-one subjects aged 44 to 70 years (median age 58 years) were recruited. Based on severity of periodontitis, 31 subjects were classified as having severe generalized chronic periodontitis, and the remaining 30 subjects had mild or no periodontitis. Social and medical histories were obtained from each patient. A comprehensive periodontal examination included: plaque index, gingival index, bleeding index, probing depth, clinical attachment level, and radiographic bone loss. Data were analyzed using Fisher's exact and chi-square tests for categorical variables, and t-test for continuous variables. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant greater loss of attachment (p < .05) around implants in the group with severe periodontitis compared to the no/mild periodontitis group. CONCLUSION: Because of the greater loss of clinical attachment around implants placed in patients with generalized severe chronic periodontitis, close monitoring of these patients is suggested to prevent both development of peri-implantitis and recurrence of periodontal infection.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".