MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413186869

Immediate loading of implants with mandibular overdentures: one-year clinical results of a prospective study.

2006· article· en· W2413186869 on OpenAlexaff
Nikolai Attard, Lesley A. David, George A. Zarb

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentistryMedicineImplantOrthodonticsSurgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The aim of this report is to present the implant and clinical outcomes of an immediate-loading protocol of TiUnite implants with mandibular overdentures in edentulous patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two groups of edentulous patients were selected. Thirty-five consecutively treated patients received 70 immediately loaded TiUnite implants and 69 Brånemark implants as backup (1 patient received 1 Brånemark implant). The control group was a historical cohort that comprised 42 patients who received 111 Brånemark implants. All overdentures were supported by a resilient bar mechanism. Implant and clinical outcomes, including maintenance events for the first year, were recorded. RESULTS: Implant success rates were in excess of 95% with both protocols. Immediately loaded implants had less bone loss than did implants loaded with the conventional protocol (Mann-Whitney U test; P = .001). Patients in the immediate-loading group required more prosthodontic maintenance, consisting of overdenture remakes and laboratory relining of prostheses (Chi-square test; P < .05). Of note, 74% of patients in the immediate-loading group needed a reline to improve the denture seal around the bar housing (Chi-square test; P < .05). CONCLUSION: The favorable implant and bone level outcomes with immediate loading attest to its biologic success. The prosthetic maintenance encountered in the immediate-loading group does not negate the clinical potential of the treatment but rather suggests that the protocol may benefit from modifications.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations55
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207