Question · asked by 1 review
Preprosthetic surgery for a conventional denture (PPS) vs Implant retained overdenture (dental implants) (IRO): Cost‐effectiveness
- Population
- Edentulous patients requiring improved denture retention
- Intervention
- Preprosthetic surgery for a conventional denture (PPS)
- Comparison
- Implant retained overdenture (dental implants) (IRO)
- Outcome
- Cost‐effectiveness
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Preprosthetic surgery for a conventional denture (PPS) vs Implant retained overdenture (dental implants) (IRO) Cost-effectiveness · Edentulous patients requiring improved denture retention Interventions for replacing missing teeth: preprosthetic surgery versus dental implants (2002) · Cochrane All outcomes | Cost-effectiveness (outcome 1.9): The cost-effectiveness data could not be extracted from the report as it was combined with a separate trial. | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for replacing missing teeth: preprosthetic surgery versus dental implants 2002 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2002-05 | Not listed | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.