The Effect of Splinted Prosthesis on Posterior Dental Implants on Radiographic Crestal Bone Levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project examined the effect of splinting adjacent dental implants of different designs [Sintered porous surface (SPS), Threaded dual acid etched (THR-DAE), Threaded sand-blasted large grit acid etched (THR-SLA)] placed in posterior sites and compared two intraoral radiographic techniques to assess peri-implant crestal bone levels. 799 implants located in 345\npatients qualified and were examined retrospectively using an inclusion criteria of a minimum one year in function and having a recent periapical (PA) and vertical bitewing radiograph (vBW). SPS had less bone loss than THR-DAA and THR-SLA. PA views showed approximately 0.10 mm (Range 0.07-0.40 mm) less crestal bone loss than vBW (P<0.01). Splinted implants had more crestal bone loss (0.30 mm; range 0.16-0.38 mm) than non-splinted implants. 49 implants failed with an overall failure rate of 4.9% with a significant difference in the failure rate\nof SPS and THR-DAA (P<0.0005) and in the time to fail (P<0.0036).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".