MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2615960187 · doi:10.1111/cid.12496

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of immediate and delayed placement of dental implants in molar and premolar regions

2017· article· en· W2615960187 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joon‐Kyu Kim, Hyun‐Joong Yoon

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePremolarMolarDentistryImplantRadiographyProsthesisRetrospective cohort studyOrthodonticsSurvival rateSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine clinical and radiographic outcomes of immediate and delayed placement of dental implants in molar and premolar regions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical and radiographic records of 116 patients who received implants in molar and premolar regions were included in this study. After implantation, patients were recalled for assessments at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and every year thereafter. In addition, anatomic location, type of prosthesis, gender, stage, diameter, and length of implants were analyzed. RESULTS: Of these 116 patients, 55 were males, and 61 were females. Their mean age was 50.9 years. They received 85 immediate implants and 147 delayed implants in molar and premolar regions. Gender, type of prosthesis, stage, implant diameter, and implant length were not significantly different between the immediate placement group and the delayed placement group, although anatomic locations were significantly different between the 2 groups. Their mean follow up time after dental implantation was 3 years (range, 6 months to 9 years). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates showed 97.8% probability of survival up to 9 years in the delayed placement group and 100% probability of survival up to 8 years in the immediate placement group. There was no significant difference in implant survival according to the time of implantation. No significant difference in cervical bone loss (CBL) at the mesial or distal side was found between the 2 groups. CBL according to anatomic location, the type of prosthesis, or gender was not significantly different either between the 2 groups. However, CBL at distal side of 1-stage approach was significantly (P < .05) smaller in the delayed placement group than that in the immediate placement group. CONCLUSION: This study showed that immediate dental implantation in molar and premolar regions had good clinical and radiographic outcomes.

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)0.004
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.358 · 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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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