ReviewOdontology2026
Utilization of platelet rich fibrin in soft tissue augmentation around dental implant: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Odontology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the current systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effect of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) on soft tissue augmentation around dental implants. The randomized clinical trials (RCT) that utilized PRF in soft tissue augmentation around dental implants were selected from different databases. The following parameters were measured: keratinized mucosa width (KMW), soft tissue thickness (STT), and crestal bone loss (CBL). The primary outcome was STT, while secondary outcomes included KMW and CBL. The outcomes were measured at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Thirteen articles were identified, including 264 patients with ages ranging from 18 to 62 years old, among which 9 articles were included in the meta-analysis. After 3 months of follow-up, there were no differences between implants placed with PRF and implants placed with connective tissue graft (CTG) in the STT (Chi
Indexed as
Identifiers
42166022What 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.