ArticleBMJ open2026
Immediate versus delayed dental implant placement: an umbrella review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionImmediate dental implant placement has been proposed as a strategy to reduce treatment time and improve patient satisfaction. However, systematic reviews addressing immediate versus delayed implant placement have reported inconsistent findings, limiting clinical interpretability. An umbrella review is warranted to synthesise, appraise and contextualise the existing evidence. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This umbrella review will include systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis comparing immediate implant placement after tooth extraction with delayed placement in healed sites. Comprehensive searches will be conducted in September 2026, in PubMed/Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Methodological quality will be assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). Overlap of primary studies will be quantified using the corrected covered area. Outcomes of interest include implant survival, success and failure rates, biological and technical complications, patient-reported outcomes and surgical time. A structured narrative synthesis will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This overview does not require ethics approval, as it uses secondary data from previously published studies. The results will be disseminated through the publication in a high-impact journal. OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GZ3DR.
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.