Dental Implants in Patients with Oral Lichen Planus: A Cross‐Sectional Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The main aim of this study was to evaluate the patients with oral lichen planus (OLP) and dental implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three groups of 16 patients took part in the study. Group I patients had received dental implants and been diagnosed with OLP; Group II had not received implants but were diagnosed with OLP; Group III had implants but not OLP. Clinical observations and OLP symptoms were registered in each case. Periodontal pocket depth, implant mobility, bleeding upon probing, erythema, pain, and radiolucency around implants were measured. Patient quality of life was evaluated using OHIP 14. RESULTS: Peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis were detected in 17.86% and 25% of the OLP-implant group, while the control group with implants showed 18% and 16%. The implant survival rate in patients treated for OLP did not appear to differ from the survival rate among the general population. Quality of life was better among patients with implants and without OLP (p = .001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that implants do not influence manifestations of OLP. OLP is not a risk factor for peri-implantitis.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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 it