ArticleJournal of periodontal & implant science2026
Clinical agreement between scale-aligned damping capacity and resonance frequency analyses for implant stability: a retrospective method-comparison study.
Article in Journal of periodontal & implant science, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the clinical agreement between resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and 2 scale-aligned damping capacity analysis (DCA) devices for assessing implant stability.
methodsIn this retrospective method-comparison study (890 implants from 600 patients), implant stability was measured at up to 4 time points (T0-T3) using 1 RFA device and 2 DCA devices. Correlations between devices were assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Agreement was evaluated using modified Bland-Altman analysis, and diagnostic accuracy was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis with an implant stability quotient threshold of 70. Changes in stability according to initial torque and simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) or sinus grafting were analyzed using non-parametric statistical methods.
resultsSignificant moderate positive correlations were observed between RFA and each DCA device (
conclusionsScale-aligned DCA devices demonstrated acceptable clinical agreement and fair diagnostic accuracy relative to RFA. However, systematic discrepancies between DCA and RFA were observed, particularly in implants with lower stability. Clinicians should therefore interpret DCA measurements with caution in such cases.
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.