MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406407414 · doi:10.1111/cid.13433

Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral With Collagen for Anterior Maxillary Ridge Augmentation: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4406407414 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qi Zhang, Zhou Yu, Yuchen Wang, Yitong Chen, Like Tang, Kaichen Lai, Ke Yu, Tingben Huang, Guoli Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDentistryMedicineRetrospective cohort studyRidgeBone mineralSurgeryOsteoporosisGeologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives This study aimed to assess the effects of deproteinized bovine bone mineral with collagen (DBBMC) combined with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) on facial alveolar bone augmentation in the anterior maxillary region. Materials and Methods Patients receiving dental implant placement with simultaneous lateral bone augmentation using DBBM (control group) or DBBMC combined with DBBM (test group) were included in the study. The radiographic assessment of facial alveolar bone, such as facial horizontal bone thickness (FHBT), facial vertical bone level (FVBL), and square of facial bone (SFB), was taken by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Generalized estimated equation (GEE) was performed to identify influencing factors associated with the contraction in square of facial bone (SFBC). Results A total of 164 implants from 164 patients were included in this study. After 6 months post‐surgery, the SFBC and the alterations of FHBT and FVBL in the test group were significantly higher than those in the control group (p < 0.05). After 1–2 years after restorations, the SFBC and the alterations of FHBT and FVBL in the test group were significantly lower than those in the control group (p < 0.05). Spearman correlation analysis demonstrated a positive correlation between the alterations of FVBL and FHBT at the implant platform level in the test group (rs = 0.322, p = 0.001; rs = 0.349, p = 0.002). Implant timing of early loading (p = 0.014) and the implant site of the central incisor (p = 0.040) were significantly associated with the SFBC. Conclusions The applications of DBBMC combined with DBBM achieved better facial alveolar bone augmentation in the anterior maxillary region, especially in early implant placement.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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