ArticleJournal of oral rehabilitation2026
Dental Implants in Adults With Intellectual Disabilities: A Multicenter Retrospective Study. Part 1: Implant Outcomes.
Article in Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2026. 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the potential benefits of implant-supported rehabilitation, data on implant performance and peri-implant health in adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) are limited.
objectiveTo evaluate dental implant outcomes in adults with non-syndromic ID and to identify variables associated with peri-implant health, complications, and implant loss.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective cohort study included adults with non-syndromic ID who received at least one dental implant and had a minimum follow-up of 36 months. Dental implants placed in 137 patients across 7 specialised centers in Spain, France, Italy, and South Korea were analysed. Standardised data were collected on patient characteristics, oral health status, implant design, prosthetic variables, and follow-up care. Clinical outcomes were categorised as peri-implant health, mucositis, peri-implantitis, or implant loss.
resultsOf the 453 implants placed, 418 (92.3%) remained functional at a mean follow-up of 75.9 ± 42.7 months (range: 36-211 months). Among the 445 implants evaluated for clinical outcomes, 63.6% were classified as healthy, 23.4% as presenting with mucositis, 4.4% with peri-implantitis, and 7.3% were lost during the follow-up period. Tissue-level implant type, cement-retained fixed prostheses, and the use of general anaesthesia during the impression step were significantly associated with peri-implant clinical outcomes. No variables were identified as statistically significant predictors of implant loss.
conclusionsDental implant therapy represents a viable long-term treatment option for adults with non-syndromic ID. Despite the clinical challenges of this population, high survival and success rates can be achieved, particularly when appropriate implant selection, prosthetic retention systems, and behavioural management techniques are implemented.
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.