Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 555

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: A systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis

Howe, Mark-Steven, Keys, William, Richards, Derek·2019·Journal of Dentistry

Abstract

OBJECTIVES To identify and appraise the most recent studies reporting dental implant survival in adults (≥18 years) using contemporary implant systems (solid screw, roughened surface) for a period of 10 years; and explore new predictors of implant survival. SOURCE MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials were searched from 1997 to January 2018 to focus on contemporary implant systems. STUDY SELECTION Only prospective observational studies with at least 10 participants and 35 implants were included. The unit of study was the 'absolute survival' rate of dental implants after 10 years in the oral cavity. Study quality was assessed utilising a modified Hoy risk of bias tool for prevalence studies. A sensitivity meta-analysis was undertaken utilising a plausibly imputed model for missing data. DATA 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. The summary estimate for 10-year survival at the implant level was 96.4% (95% CI 95.2%-97.5%) and the prediction interval was 91.5%-99.4%. The sensitivity meta-analysis summary estimate of survival was 93.2% (95% CI 90.1% to 95.8%)p = 0.041 with a prediction interval of 76.6%-100%. Older age (≥ 65 years) was a significant predictor at 91.5%, p = 0.038 in the sensitivity meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS A traditional analysis produced similar 10-year survival estimates to previous systematic reviews. A more realistic sensitivity meta-analysis accounting for loss to follow-up data and the calculation of prediction intervals demonstrated a possible doubling of the risk of implant loss in the older age groups. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Improved analysis provides the clinician with better estimation of the real-world risk of implant failures so helping the clinician communicate the potential risk to patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jdent.2019.03.008

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

2 retracted

Show all 64 references

Metadata

Authors
Howe, M.-S., Keys, W., & Richards, D.
Venue
Journal of Dentistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-05
Volume
84
Pages
9-21
ISSN
0300-5712 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2923823750
Cited by
555
References
64
FWCI
9.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: A systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jdent.2019.03.008
The paper
Howe, M.-S., Keys, W., & Richards, D. (2019). Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: A systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2019.03.008

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.