Question · asked by 1 review
Laser-welded titanium framework vs Cast gold framework: Framework survival (5 years)
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Laser-welded titanium framework vs Cast gold framework Framework survival (5 years) · Patients with implant-supported FDPs; split-mouth, 5-year · 5 years Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition (2012) · Cochrane All outcomes | 95% (20/21) titanium and 100% cast gold frameworks surviving 5 years; could not calculate an estimate of relative risk from the data as presented; non-significant differences in maintenance visits and alveolar bone loss | 1 study · 21 participants | 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 | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.