ArticleBioinformation2026
Comparative evaluation of osseointegration in photo-functionalized versus PRF-coated implants: A split-mouth clinical study.
Article in Bioinformation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early implant failure and marginal bone loss remain important clinical challenges in implant dentistry and various surface modification techniques have been proposed to enhance osseointegration. Therefore, it is of interest to compare the osseointegration and marginal bone loss of photofunctionalized and PRF-coated implants in completely edentulous mandibular arches. Twelve patients received a total of twenty-four implants, with each patient receiving one UV-activated implant and one PRF-coated implant. Implant stability was evaluated using resonance frequency analysis and marginal bone loss was assessed radiographically over a period of three months. Both groups showed steady improvement in osseointegration, with PRF-coated implants demonstrating slightly higher mean ISQ values, although the difference was not statistically significant. Marginal bone loss was minimal and comparable in both groups, indicating that both techniques performed similarly in terms of early implant stability and bone preservation.
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.