ArticleBioinformation2025
Evaluating the effect of polymer and titanium abutments on peri-implant tissues: A comparative clinical study.
Article in Bioinformation, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evaluation between titanium and polymer abutments regarding peri-implant soft tissue health took place in a study involving 40 patients with posterior implants. Therefore, it is of interest to evaluate the plaque index (PI), Bleeding on probing (BOP) and Probing depth (PD) together with radiographic bone level assessments at three specified time points: baseline and 3 months as well as 6 months. The clinical assessment of Group B (polymer) at 6 months revealed superior outcomes including a decreased PI score to 0.88 alongside reduced BOP to 10% and contractions in PD up to 2.6 mm compared to 0.92 PI, 15% BOP and 2.9 mm PD. Group B participants showed smaller marginal bone loss than Group A with differences at 0.38 mm vs. 0.45 mm although results were not statistically meaningful. Patients obtained better results from polymer abutments although both types of abutment functioned properly.
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.