MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2305995492 · doi:10.1111/cid.12417

Radiological and Biological Assessment of Immediately Restored Anterior Maxillary Implants Combined with GBR and Free Connective Tissue Graft

2016· article· en· W2305995492 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roni Kolerman, Joseph Nissan, Arkadi Rahmanov, Eran Zenziper, Gil Slutzkey, Haim Tal

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConnective tissueMedicineDentistryRadiological weaponSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Radiologic and biologic assessment of immediately restored Implants combined with guided bone regeneration (GBR) and free connective tissue graft. METHODS: 1-4 year retrospective study involving 34 patients treated with maxillary immediately restored anterior single-implants. Soft tissue dimensions, radiographic bone loss, and biological and prosthetic complications were assessed. RESULTS: During the mean follow up period of 29 months the study group presented a mean mesial bone loss of 1.10 ± 0.39 mm (range: 0.5-2.4 mm), and mean distal bone loss of 1.19 ± 0.41 mm (range: 0.4-2.1 mm). Mean periimplant probing depth of 3.49 mm (SD ± 1.06) and 2.35 (SD ± 0.52) for the contralateral tooth (highly significant p < 0.001). Bleeding on probing was present in 29.4% of the examined implant supported crown sites and 10.4% of the contralateral teeth (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Anterior maxillary single-tooth replacement, using GBR and connective tissue graft according to the concept of immediate implant placement, and non-functional restoration is an accepted treatment modality achieving favorable peri-implant soft tissue condition.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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