Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24065635›Full record

SynthesisJournal of dental research2014

Comparison of long-term survival of implants and endodontically treated teeth.

F C Setzer, S Kim

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of dental research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

F C SetzerUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
S Kim

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The outcomes of both dental implants and endodontically treated teeth have been extensively studied. However, there is still a great controversy over when to keep a natural tooth and when to extract it for a dental implant. This article reviews the benefits and disadvantages of both treatment options and discusses success vs. survival outcomes, as well as the impact of technical advances for modern endodontics and endodontic microsurgery on the long-term prognosis of tooth retention.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsHumansMicrosurgeryPrognosisRoot Canal TherapySurvival AnalysisTooth LossTooth, NonvitalTreatment OutcomeDental Implantsdental implantsendodontic therapyoral healthoutcomesystematic reviewtreatment planning

Identifiers

PMID24065635
PMCPMC3872851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.