ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2024
Assessment of Posterior Maxillary Alveolar Bone for Immediate Implant Placement: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the Accuracy of Working Casts Fabricated by Four Implant Impression Techniques in Parallel and Nonparallel Implant Configurations.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- The significance of maxillary sinus septum height in relation to posterior maxillary alveolar bone height: a retrospective CBCT analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Radiation-specific Automated Dosimetric dental, Mandible, and maxilla Annotation for Predicting Periodontal Problems (RADMAP): A semi-automated tool for dosimetric oral risk communication and osteoradionecrosis assessment.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aims of this study were to evaluate posterior maxillary alveolar bone dimensions and to compare these dimensions in males and females. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe sample consisted of 102 cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images for 62 male patients (mean age 29.92 ± 9.04 years) and 40 female patients (mean age 29.70 ± 9.54 years). Four distances and three densities were measured; a multivariate analysis of variance and Mann-Whitney's
resultsFor the first maxillary molar, there were significant differences between males and females in terms of coronal width (13.95 ± 1.31 and 13.22 ± 1.159 mm, respectively) and middle width (14.28 ± 1.43 and 13.57 ± 1.478 mm, respectively). However, no significant difference was found regarding height (7.93 ± 3.8 mm for both) or apical width (14.68 ± 2 mm for both). Regarding the second maxillary molar, significant differences between males and females were found in terms of coronal width (14.66 ± 1.63 and 13.54 ± 1.512 mm, respectively), middle width (14.35 ± 1.825 and 13.25 ± 1.52 mm, respectively), and height (7.29 ± 3.00 and 8.66 ± 3.16 mm, respectively), whereas the gender dimorphism regarding apical width had borderline significance (14.09 ± 1.731 mm;
conclusionThe minimum average alveolar bone height for the second maxillary molar region was 7.29 ± 30 mm with significant gender dimorphism. Therefore, CBCT scans should be recommended prior to immediate implant placement.
Identifiers
What 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.