Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41393492›Full record

ArticleBioinformation2025

Assessment of bite pressure differences between implant-supported prostheses and natural dentition.

Sushrima Dey, Soumya Iranna Dudhani, Deesha Chhaya, Sapam Shinttoo Devi, Monesh Shashikant Sharma, Rahul Raviraj Shetty, Miral Mehta

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

7 authors.

Sushrima DeyDepartment of Periodontology & Oral Implantology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, KIIT Deemed to be University Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Soumya Iranna DudhaniDepartment of Prosthodontics, Crown & Bridge, Government Dental College and Hospital, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India.
Deesha ChhayaDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, College of Dental Sciences and Research Center, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.
Sapam Shinttoo DeviDepartment of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge, Teerthankeer Mahaveer Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad (TMU), Uttar Pradesh, India.
Monesh Shashikant SharmaDepartment of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, SMBT Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Dhamangaon, Maharashtra, India.
Rahul Raviraj ShettyDepartment of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Bharati Vidyapeeth(Deemed to be University)Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, India.
Miral MehtaDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Karnavati University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A comparative analysis of the bite pressure between the mandibular first molars region using implant-supported prostheses and the contralateral side natural teeth is of interest. NUPAI and T-Scan III systems were used in the assessment of thirty-five patients. Data shows that maximum (34.2 vs 28.7 MPa) and average bite pressures (25.8 vs 21.4 MPa) and their contact areas (28.4 vs 24.1 mm 2) were noticeably greater on the natural tooth side (p < 0.05). The males showed an 18 percent higher bite power and differences were observed with age. Thus, natural teeth are better than implants because of proprioceptive feedback, which justifies the importance of appropriate adjustment of occlusion in implant prosthodontics.

Indexed as

Bite forcedental implantsdigital dentistryocclusal analysisprosthetic rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID41393492
PMCPMC12697505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.