ArticleClinical oral implants research2025
Clinical Trends in the Prevention of Peri-Implantitis: Spanish Society of Periodontology (SEPA) Foundation Survey Using the Delphi Method.
Article in Clinical oral implants research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess clinical trends to prevent peri-implantitis in applying a two-step survey based on the Delphi method. MATERIAL AND
methodsA panel of participants aged < 45 years old selected by the Spanish Society of Periodontology (SEPA) was asked to answer a survey with 75 statements prepared by a steering committee. Items were divided into 5 major areas: etiopathogenesis and epidemiology, surgical, implant, and prosthetic-related factors on the onset/progression of peri-implantitis, and self- and professional-administered oral hygiene. Degree of agreement or disagreement among participants was reported.
resultsIn total, 44 participants responded favorably to participate in the survey. From the 75 statements formulated, 35 were agreed on in a first round (46.7%). From the 40 statements that did not reach consensus, 16 were agreed on in a second round (40.0%). Overall, 51 out of 75 statements (68.0%) achieved consensus in a second round. From these, 36 (48.0%) were in agreement, while 15 (20.0%) were in disagreement. The sections that explored surgical-related factors and prosthesis-related factors of peri-implantitis yielded the highest level of conflict (9/18 and 8/14 statements demonstrated indeterminate agreement, respectively). In the sections on the etiopathogenesis and epidemiology of peri-implantitis and implant-related factors, most items reached consensus (14/17 and 10/13 items, respectively). The section on self- and professional-administered oral hygiene obtained the highest level of consensus, with only 1/13 items showing dissent among the participants.
conclusionThe results of this study on the clinical trends in the prevention of peri-implantitis showed consensus agreement for ∼70% of the statements evaluated.
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.