Question · asked by 1 review
Zirconia framework FDP vs Metal framework FDP: Survival / framework fracture (3 years)
- Population
- Patients receiving FDPs; parallel group, 3-year
- Intervention
- Zirconia framework FDP
- Comparison
- Metal framework FDP
- Outcome
- Survival / framework fracture (3 years)
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Zirconia framework FDP vs Metal framework FDP Survival / framework fracture (3 years) · Patients receiving FDPs; parallel group, 3-year · 3 years Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition (2012) · Cochrane All outcomes | 100% survival and no framework fractures in either group after 3 years; no significant differences between groups with respect to porcelain fractures and mean survival time (narrative) | 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: partially absent dentition 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2011-03 | 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.