MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Measurements of Tooth Movements in Relation to Single-Implant Restorations during 16 Years: A Case Report

2005· article· en· W2104341491 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Torsten Jemt

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentistryImplantOrthodonticsRelation (database)MedicineGeologyComputer scienceData miningSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Osseointegrated implants behave as ankylotic abutments, and their positions are not affected by dentofacial changes. PURPOSE: To measure changes in occlusion in relation to single implants in one patient after more than 15 years in function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One 25-year-old female was treated with two single implants in the upper central incisor and bicuspid area after trauma. Study casts made prior to treatment (1987) and after 16 years in function (2004) were scanned by means of an optical scanner. Using the palate as the reference, the models were placed in the same coordinate system and analyzed and compared in a computer-aided design (CAD) program. The results of the measurements of the casts were also compared with clinical photographs taken at the time of treatment (1988), after 9 years (1997), and after 16 years (2004) in function. RESULTS: The clinical photographs showed obvious signs of implant infraposition after 9 years. New crowns were made in the incisor region after 15 years (2002), but signs of infraposition were again present at the final examination (2004). Measurements of the casts indicated small tooth movements with a pattern of slight eruption of upper teeth combined with a palatal inclination, mesial drift, and lingual inclination and crowding of the lower anterior teeth. The small measured vertical eruption of the teeth was less than the observed clinical infraposition of the implant crowns, indicating that the vertical position of the palatal may have changed in relation to the implants as well. CONCLUSION: Obvious dentofacial changes may take place in adult patients. Teeth may adjust for this, and no major problems may arise in the dentate patient. However, because the positions of implants are not affected by dentofacial changes, other patterns of clinical problems can be seen when implant patients present with these changes. The character and frequency of these dentofacial changes that may compromise implant treatment in the long term are not yet known.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations46
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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