Oral Health Related Quality of Life of Patients Using Conventional Dentures versus Implant-Supported Overdentures
Ramtin Azar; Hassan Semyari; Mohamad Javad Kharazifard · 2020 · Frontiers in Dentistry
WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate
The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to compare the oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients using conventional dentures versus implant-supported overdentures. Materials and Methods: This study evaluated the OHRQoL of 90 patients between 35 to 75 years who were selected from several public and private dental clinics in Tehran in 2018. Of all, 45 had conventional dentures of both jaws, and 45 had a mandibular overdenture supported by two implants at the site of mandibular canine teeth and a conventional maxillary denture. The OHRQoL of patients was determined using the Oral Health Impac
Abstract by Ramtin Azar; Hassan Semyari; Mohamad Javad Kharazifard, Frontiers in Dentistry (2020) — licensed CC BY 4.0.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study
Negative / Null Result ReportBioactivity evaluation of three calcium silicate‐based endodontic materials
Negative / Null Result ReportIncidence of impacted mandibular and maxillary third molars-a radiographic study in a Southeast Iran population
Negative / Null Result ReportAnti‐infective therapy of peri‐implantitis with adjunctive local drug delivery or photodynamic therapy: 12‐month outcomes of a randomized controlled clinical trial
Negative / Null Result ReportExploring the genetic basis of chronic periodontitis: a genome-wide association study
Negative / Null Result ReportIn Vitro Biofilm Formation on Titanium and Zirconia Implant Surfaces
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: DOAJ · DOI 10.18502/fid.v17i1.3964