Longitudinal assessment of clinical and radiographic periimplant status around narrow and regular diameter implants placed in cigarette‐smokers and nonsmokers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date, no clinical investigation has assessed the clinical and radiographic indices around narrow diameter implants (NDIs) and regular diameter implants (RDIs) in individuals with cigarette smoking habit and nonsmokers. OBJECTIVE: To estimate and compare the clinical and radiographic indices around NDIs (< 3.3 mm) and RDIs placed in cigarette smokers (CS) and nonsmokers (NS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-six patients requiring implant surgery in the anterior mandible were divided into two groups (39 CS and 43 NS). Patients were further categorized into two subgroups on the basis of implant diameter: (a) patients with NDIs (3.3 mm) and (b) patients with RDIs (4.1 mm). Clinical indices evaluating plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), and probing depth (PD) were recorded at 18 and 36 months of follow-up. Digital periapical radiographs were studied to evaluate crestal bone levels (CBL) incorporating in a specialized software and examined on a calibrated computer display screen with the help of an image analyzer. RESULTS: The mean age of patients in CS group and NS group was 44.6 and 42.5 years, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the overall mean scores of PI, PD, and CBL around NDIs and RDIs among CS and NS patients at 18 and 36 months of follow-up. However, there was a statistically significant difference only in the overall mean BOP around NDIs and RDIs among CS and NS patients at 18 and 36 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: The findings of the current study suggests that NDIs can show reliable clinical stability and radiographic bone levels as RDIs placed in CS and NS, with the support of strict oral hygiene protocols.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".