ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2026
Patient-Centered Assessment of Palatal Donor Site Healing Using Platelet-Rich Fibrin Versus Collagen: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Effective care of the palatal donor site after graft removal is vital for patient comfort and wound recovery. This study evaluated the effectiveness of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) compared with a collagen sponge as a dressing for palatal donor sites and its effects on patient-reported outcome measures. Materials and Methods: Patients requiring soft-tissue augmentation were enrolled in this randomized controlled clinical trial. They were divided into two groups: PRF (experimental group) and collagen sponge (control group). De-epithelialized free gingival grafts were harvested from the palate, and donor sites were treated with either PRF or collagen sponge dressings. Patient-reported outcomes and wound-healing rates were evaluated. Results: Physical pain and physical disability scores were significantly better in the PRF group. Postoperative pain scores measured using the visual analog scale (VAS) were notably lower in the PRF group. No significant differences were found in psychological disability, social disability, or handicap scores between the groups. Conclusion: PRF appears to offer superior outcomes compared with collagen sponge for palatal donor-site management, including better patient comfort, faster healing, and cost-effectiveness. Further research is needed to establish the advantages of PRF over conventional treatments.
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.