MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Effect of Repeated Torque in Small Diameter Implants with Machined and Premachined Abutments

2012· article· en· W2151980375 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abolfazl Saboury, Hamid Neshandar Asli, Shahram Vaziri

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsDentistryDental AbutmentsOrthodonticsMaterials scienceTorqueImplantMedicineSurgeryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Detorquing value is an important factor in the amount of preload stresses during abutment screw fastening. This study evaluated the percentage of detorque values in two-piece machined titanium and premachined cast abutments in small diameter implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three groups of five samples were evaluated. Group 1 (G1), machined titanium abutments, group 2 (G2), premachined cast straight abutments that cast with gold-palladium, and group 3 (G3), premachined angled cast abutments that cast with the same alloy, were angled before casting. Each abutment was torque to 24 Ncm according to the manufacturer's instructions and detorqued five times. The means of detorquing and torquing values in all groups were recorded. The mean of detorque in each group as a percentage of the toque value was calculated. The data for all groups were compared and calculated using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and t-test. RESULTS: Mean detorque values in G1, G2, and G3 were 88.1 ± 1.69, 93.1 ± 2.68, and 80.9 ± 4.95%, respectively. The ANOVA showed significant differences in mean of applied detorque (p < .001) and torque (p = .06) tightening among different groups. G2 had significantly greater detorque values (p < .05). No significant differences were found between G1 and G2. Surprisingly, abutment screw fracture occurred in three samples of G3. CONCLUSIONS: G3 showed significant percentage torque reduction (p < .05) and exhibited abutment screw fracture during evaluation. G2 presented the lowest torque reduction. Screw fracture occurred only in G3.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.377 · 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

Citations16
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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