MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412768550 · doi:10.1111/cid.70081

A Multicenter Study of Factors Related to Early Implant Failures—Part 2: Patient Factors

2025· article· en· W4412768550 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rachel Duhan Wåhlberg, Victoria Franke Stenport, Ann Wennerberg, Lars Hjalmarsson

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVetenskapsrådetVästra Götalandsregionen
KeywordsMedicineImplantCohortLogistic regressionCohort studyImplant failureDentistryRetrospective cohort studyDental implantSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in dental implant materials, designs, and surgery have increased their use, especially for challenging local conditions. As guidelines for individualized risk assessment are increasingly emphasized, implant treatment has become available to patients with diverse medical backgrounds. However, clinical research with large patient groups is needed to investigate the effects of patient-related factors associated with early implant failure. PURPOSE: This paper investigates patient factors in two patient cohorts associated with early implant complications and failures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The collected data were analyzed and presented in two studies. Both studies followed the same data collection methodology and compared cohorts treated in 2007 and 2017. The same patient-level dataset was analyzed, although the second study included additional analyses of diseases and allergies. Data were analyzed univariately (p < 0.20) to select variables for the multivariable logistic regression model (p < 0.05), with early implant failures and complications as dependent variables. RESULTS: In total, 1875 patients with 4670 implants were included. There were 74 (3.7%) dropouts, mainly due to lack of data. The 2007 cohort comprised 799 patients with 2473 implants, and the 2017 cohort comprised 1076 patients with 2287 implants. Differences were observed between the two cohorts for the number of implants per patient, exposed implant threads, and preoperative antibiotics. In the 2007 cohort, 23 (2.9%) patients had early implant failure. In the 2017 cohort, 40 (3.7%) had early implant failure (p > 0.30). Significantly more implants failed in the 2017 cohort (n = 56, 2.4%) than in the 2007 cohort (n = 26, 1.1%) (p < 0.001). Early complications were reported for 56 (7.0%) patients in 2007 and 145 (13.5%) patients in 2017 (p < 0.001). Three patient-related variables were associated with an increased risk of early failure-food allergy, exposed implant threads, and increased number of implants. Seven variables were related to an increased risk of complications: smoking, exposed threads, no preoperative antibiotics, number of implants, sinus perforations, food allergy, and metal allergy. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified three factors associated with early implant failure and seven associated with early complications.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.362 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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