MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803541298 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000010721

The patient general satisfaction of mandibular single-implant overdentures and conventional complete dentures

2018· article· en· W2803541298 on OpenAlexaff
Manabu Kanazawa, Mariko Tanoue, Anna Miyayasu, Shin Takeshita, Daisuke Sato, Mari Asami, Thuy Vo Lam, Khaing Myat Thu, Ken Oda, Yuriko Komagamine, Shunsuke Minakuchi, Jocelyne S. Feine

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersITI Foundation
KeywordsDenturesMedicineDentistryImplantPatient satisfactionRandomized controlled trialMandible (arthropod mouthpart)OrthodonticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mandibular overdentures retained by a single implant placed in the midline of edentulous mandible have been reported to be more comfortable and function better than complete dentures. Although single-implant overdentures are still more costly than conventional complete dentures, there are a few studies which investigated whether mandibular single-implant overdentures are superior to complete dentures when patient general satisfaction is compared. The aim of this study is to assess patient general satisfaction with mandibular single-implant overdentures and complete dentures. METHODS: This study is a randomized crossover trial to compare mandibular single-implant overdentures and complete dentures in edentulous individuals. Participant recruitment is ongoing at the time of this submission. Twenty-two participants will be recruited. New mandibular complete dentures will be fabricated. A single implant will be placed in the midline of the edentulous mandible. The mucosal surface of the complete denture around the implant will be relieved for 3 months. The participants will then be randomly allocated into 2 groups according to the order of the interventions; group 1 will receive single-implant overdentures first and will wear them for 2 months, followed by complete dentures for 2 months. Group 2 will receive the same treatments in a reverse order. After experiencing the 2 interventions, the participants will choose one of the mandibular prostheses, and yearly follow-up visits are planned for 5 years. The primary outcome of this trial is patient ratings of general satisfaction on 100 mm visual analog scales. Assessments of the prostheses and oral health-related quality of life will also be recorded as patient-reported outcomes. The secondary outcomes are cost and time for treatment. Masticatory efficiency and cognitive capacity will also be recorded. Furthermore, qualitative research will be performed to investigate the factors associated with success of these mandibular denture types. Clinical outcomes, such as implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, and prosthodontic complications, will also be recorded. DISCUSSION: The results of this randomized crossover trial will clarify whether mandibular single implants and overdentures for edentulous individuals provide better patient general satisfaction when compared to conventional complete dentures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Center (UMIN000017883).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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