Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40919047›Full record

ArticleThe journal of advanced prosthodontics2025

Digital analysis of occlusion variations in single posterior implant-supported fixed prostheses: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trial studies.

Victor Augusto Alves Bento, Cleber Davi Del Rei Daltro Rosa, Leonardo Ferreira de Toledo Piza Lopes, Cleidiel Aparecido de Araújo Lemos, Eduardo Miyashita, Eduardo Piza Pellizzer

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Victor Augusto Alves BentoDental School, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0558-4239
Cleber Davi Del Rei Daltro RosaDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araçatuba Dental School, UNESP - Univ Estadual Paulista, Araçatuba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7350-2525
Leonardo Ferreira de Toledo Piza LopesDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araçatuba Dental School, UNESP - Univ Estadual Paulista, Araçatuba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8623-9658
Cleidiel Aparecido de Araújo LemosDepartment of Dentistry, Federal University of Juiz de Fora - Campus Governador Valadares (UFJF-GV), Governador Valadares, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8273-489X
Eduardo MiyashitaDepartment of Dentistry, University Paulista - UNIP, Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1098-714X
Eduardo Piza PellizzerDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araçatuba Dental School, UNESP - Univ Estadual Paulista, Araçatuba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0670-5004

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis systematic review and meta- analysis aimed to evaluate the occlusion variations in single posterior implant supported fixed prostheses. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and the study was registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) platform (CRD42024501657). A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases published until December 2024 was done by 2 independent reviewers, without restriction of language or publication date. A meta-analysis was performed using the R version 4.0.2, considering the significance level

resultsFive studies were included, totaling 150 participants and 146 posterior single implant-supported fixed prostheses evaluated over time. The meta-analyses were performed with different follow-up months to evaluate the means in percentage the occlusal variations: 0,5 months (5,91%); 3 months (7,70%); 6 months (8,29%); 12 months (13,01%); 24 months (14,31%); 36 months (19,41%). Significant difference (

conclusionImplant-supported prostheses present occlusal variations after installation, with a progressive increase over time, being significant after 12 months of installation. Therefore, careful long-term monitoring of occlusion is essential, with occlusal adjustments being considered when necessary.

Indexed as

Dental implantImplant-supported prosthesesOcclusal variationsSingle crown

Identifiers

PMID40919047
PMCPMC12411302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.