SynthesisClinical oral implants research2026
Patient- and Clinician-Reported Outcomes and Outcome Measures Evaluating Timing of Implant Placement in the Edentulous Maxilla: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies.
Synthesis in Clinical oral implants research, 2026. 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.
- Consensus Report of Group 1 of the 1st Global Consensus for Clinical Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of the Edentulous Maxilla: Number of Implants, Timing of Implant Placement and Loading.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Article
- 1st Global Consensus for Clinical Guidelines: Identifying a Core Outcome Set for Implant Dentistry in Edentulous Maxilla Rehabilitation.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo address what patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinician-reported outcomes (ClinROs) have been reported, and what measures (PROMs and CROMs) have been used to assess them in clinical studies on the timing of implant placement in the edentulous maxilla? MATERIALS AND
methodsSystematic searches were conducted in five databases to identify longitudinal prospective clinical studies. PROMs, CROMs, and methods were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed based on study design, and outcomes were analyzed descriptively.
resultsThirteen studies were included: 1 randomized controlled trial and 12 case series. Delayed placement was reported in 9 studies, immediate in 2, and both in 2. Regarding PROs, 16 outcomes were identified, including oral health-related quality of life (reported in 53.85%), pain intensity (38.46%), satisfaction with the prosthesis (23.08%), postoperative drug use (15.38%), and outcomes related to well-being during surgery, treatment satisfaction, oral health satisfaction, psychosocial impact, daily life impairment and prosthesis functionality, among others (each 7.69%). Eighteen ClinROs were identified. Implant survival was reported in 38.46% of studies, prosthetic complications in 30.77%, and prosthetic survival in 23.08%. Peri-implant health parameters-bone level changes, probing depth, plaque and bleeding indices-were reported in 23.08%. Fewer studies assessed swelling (15.38%), surgical parameters (11.54%), articulation, and oromyofunctional behavior (5.6%). Assessment methods varied widely, limiting comparability. No clear pattern was observed regarding the timing of implant placement.
conclusionsPROs and ClinROs exhibited significant heterogeneity in domains, methods, and reporting. Harmonizing outcome selection and establishing a core outcome set are needed to enhance comparability and reliability.
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.