Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31835749›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2019

Influence of Biologically Oriented Preparation Technique on Peri-Implant Tissues; Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial with Three-Year Follow-Up. Part I: Hard Tissues.

Rubén Agustín-Panadero, Naia Bustamante-Hernández, María Fernanda Solá-Ruíz, Álvaro Zubizarreta-Macho, Antonio Fons-Font, Lucía Fernández-Estevan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Peri-Implant Behavior of Tissue Level Dental Implants with a Convergent Neck.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rubén Agustín-PanaderoDepartment of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2757-6619
Naia Bustamante-HernándezDepartment of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain.
María Fernanda Solá-RuízDepartment of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7946-6932
Álvaro Zubizarreta-MachoDepartment of Implant Surgery, Faculty of Health Sciences, Alfonso X el Sabio University, 28691 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9362-9702
Antonio Fons-FontDepartment of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain.
Lucía Fernández-EstevanDepartment of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain.
Universitat de València · ESUniversidad Alfonso X el Sabio · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe objective of this prospective randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to analyze and compare the clinical behavior of three types of prosthesis supported by single implants in the posterior region after three years functional loading. MATERIALS AND

methodsSeventy-five implants were divided into three groups according to the type of prosthetic restoration: screw-retained crown (Group GS); cemented crown without finishing line (biologically oriented preparation technique) (Group GBOPT); and conventional cemented crown with finishing line (Group GCC). The clinical behavior of each restoration type was analyzed after 3 years functional loading by analyzing radiographic peri-implant bone loss.

resultsGBOPT obtained the least bone loss (

conclusionsBone loss around implants is related to the type of prosthetic restoration it supports, whereby cemented BOPT crowns present less bone loss.

Indexed as

bone losscemented BOPThard tissueimplant-supported prosthesisscrewed

Identifiers

PMID31835749
PMCPMC6947345
OpenAlexW4241594812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.