ReviewBritish dental journal2016
Differentiating success from survival in modern implantology--key considerations for case selection, predicting complications and obtaining consent.
Review in British dental journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationship Between Implant Connection and Implant Fracture: Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the accuracy of fully guided implant placement by undergraduate students and postgraduate dentists: a comparative prospective clinical study.International journal of implant dentistry · 2024Observational
- Preoperative HbA1c and Blood Glucose Measurements in Diabetes Mellitus before Oral Surgery and Implantology Treatments.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Management of missing maxillary lateral incisors in general practice: space opening versus space closure.British dental journal · 2019Article
- Unilateral removable partial dentures.British dental journal · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of dental implants to restore edentulous areas has increased significantly since the 1970s and is now considered, by many, the gold standard restorative treatment. As such it has become increasingly important to understand what constitutes success for these rehabilitations. Increasing focus has been given to acknowledging the difference between success and survival: the two being potentially very different outcomes for such invasive and expensive treatment. This article aims to describe this distinction and ultimately the implications of this for both patient and clinician.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26768466What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.