Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38020257›Full record

ArticleDental research journal2023

Effect of conventionally fabricated and three-dimensional printed provisional restorations on hard and soft peri-implant tissues in the mandibular posterior region: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

Smriti Kaushik, Manu Rathee, Prachi Jain, Sanju Malik, Vipul Agarkar, Maqbul Alam

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dental research journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. ZnO/SiOMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Smriti KaushikDepartment of Prosthodontics, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Manu RatheeDepartment of Prosthodontics, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Prachi JainDepartment of Prosthodontics, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Sanju MalikDepartment of Prosthodontics, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Vipul AgarkarDepartment of Prosthodontics, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Maqbul AlamDepartment of Prosthodontics, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Pandit Bhagwat Dayal Sharma University of Health Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to conduct a randomized controlled clinical trial to compare and evaluate the effect of provisional restorations fabricated by two techniques, namely, conventional and three-dimensional (3D) printing processes on the peri-implant hard and soft tissues over early nonfunctional loaded implants in the mandibular posterior region. Materials and Methods: A randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted across 24 subjects broadly divided into two groups with 12 dental implants each, i.e., GpIC with conventionally fabricated provisional restoration and GpIID with 3D printed fabricated provisional restoration. The prosthetic phase was carried out at 2 weeks, and subjects were evaluated at baseline (at the time of prosthesis placement), 2 months, and 4 months for peri-implant marginal bone level, mucosal suppuration, sulcular probing depth, and modified sulcular bleeding index. Patient satisfaction was assessed using 5-item questionnaires at 4 months. The intragroup comparison for all the data was done using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The intergroup comparison for all the data was done using Mann-Whitney Results: Nonsignificant difference was observed in all the hard and soft tissue parameters between the groups at baseline, 2 months, and 4 months ( Conclusion: The effect of conventionally fabricated and 3D printed provisional restorations on peri-implant hard and soft tissues was comparable to each other on an early nonfunctionally loaded implant in the mandibular posterior region.

Indexed as

Dental implantsdental prosthesisthree-dimensional printing

Identifiers

PMID38020257
PMCPMC10680073
OpenAlexW4389179166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.