ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigation of the Effect of Local Melatonin Application on Biomechanic Bone-Implant Connection in Titanium Implants with Different Surface Placed in Rat Tibias.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Effects of Two Dental Implant Micromotor Systems for Dental Implant Placement on Implant Stability and Removal Torque: An Animal Experiment.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Background: Osseointegration is critical for the success of dental implants. Surface modifications of dental implants play a crucial role in enhancing osseointegration and implant stability. This in-vitro study aims to evaluate the influence of various surface modifications on dental implant stability. Materials and Methods: Dental implants with different surface modifications were prepared and subjected to in-vitro testing. Surface modifications included sandblasting, acid etching, and plasma spraying. Implant stability was assessed using resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and pull-out tests. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the stability of implants with different surface modifications. Results: The results showed that implants with sandblasted and acid-etched surfaces exhibited significantly higher stability compared with those with only a machined surface. The mean RFA values for sandblasted and acid-etched implants were 75 ± 5 and 80 ± 6, respectively, whereas machined implants recorded a mean RFA value of 60 ± 4. Similarly, pull-out tests demonstrated higher maximum tensile strengths for sandblasted and acid-etched implants compared with machined implants. Conclusion: Surface modifications, such as sandblasting and acid etching, significantly enhance dental implant stability
Indexed as
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.