CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 108Dental materials and restorationsOral microbiology and periodontitis researchPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments

Overhanging dental restorations and periodontal disease.

Open access
Gilmore, Neville, Sheiham, Aubrey·1971·Journal of Periodontology
DOI 10.1902/jop.1971.42.1.8
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Peer Reviewed

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1902/jop.1971.42.1.8

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 9 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingreasoning

    Persons with an O.P.R. had on average 0.22 mm or 0.08 tenths of tooth length less alveolar bone adjacent to surfaces with O.P.R. than homologue surfaces without O.P.R. in the same mouth.

    “Since there was a difference in P.D.I, scores between affected and nonaffected teeth, it was not sur prising that persons with an O.P.R. were found to have an average of 0.22 millimeters or 0.08 tenths of tooth length less alveolar bone on the average adjacent to surfaces with O.P.R. than homologue surfaces without O.P.R. in the same mouth.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Males and females had essentially similar percentages of O.P.R. teeth and surfaces.

    “This showed that males and females had essentially similar percentages of O.P.R. teeth and surfaces.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Using tenths of tooth length as a measure of bone loss, the differences between affected and nonaffected teeth were also significant (P<0.02).

    “Using tenths of tooth length as a measure of bone loss, the differences between affected and nonaffected teeth were also significant (P < 0.02).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Teeth with an O.P.R. had significantly more alveolar bone loss adjacent to the affected surface compared to the homologue surface when measured in millimeters of bone loss (P<0.001).

    “Teeth with an O.P.R. had significantly more alveolar bone loss adjacent to the affected surface compared to the homologue surface when measured in millimeters of bone loss (P < 0.001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Premisecitation
    § Overhanging Dental Restorations and Periodontal Disease by

    Overhanging margins to dental restorations have been cited as local irritants in periodontal disease.

    “In addition to den tal plaque and calculus, overhanging margins to dental restorations have been cited as local irritants in perio dontal disease.[1][2][3]”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1][2][3]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims. 13
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 9

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Although there was a statistically significant lower alveolar bone level adjacent to overhangs than adjacent to homologue surfaces, the differences were less than expected.

    “Although there was a statistically significant lower alveolar bone level adjacent to overhangs than adjacent to homologue surfaces, the differences were less than expected.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In 18-24 year olds, 24% of teeth with proximal restorations and 20% of restored proximal surfaces had overhangs; in 40-44 year olds, 32% of restored teeth and 27% of restored proximal surfaces had overhangs.

    “In 18 to 24 year olds, 24 percent of teeth with proximal restorations and 20 percent of proximally restored sur faces had overhangs.Persons aged 40 to 44 years had 32 percent of restored teeth and 27 percent of restored proximal surfaces with overhangs (Table 3).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Overhanging posterior restorations were not evenly distributed in the mouth; a higher percentage occurred in maxillary than mandibular quadrants, with almost equal distribution on right and left sides of each arch.

    “The O.P.R. were not evenly distributed in the mouth.A higher percentage of O.P.R. occurred in the maxillary than in the mandibular quadrants.However, there was almost an equal distribution of O.P.R. on the right and left sides of each arch (Table 4).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The ratio of average difference in bone heights by tenths and mm methods estimated average tooth length of 27.1 mm, which does not differ markedly from 24.4 mm reported by Black (1902).

    “However, when the ratio of average dif ference in bone heights by the”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Black (1902)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Certain teeth displayed a tendency for one surface to be affected more than the other; e.g., mesial O.P.R. in maxillary first molars accounted for ~14% of all O.P.R. vs ~6% for distal surfaces; distal of mandibular first premolars contributed 3.1% vs 0.4% for mesial.

    “Although the overall distribution of O.P.R. indicated that the mesial and dis tal surfaces were approximately equally affected, certain teeth displayed a tendency for one surface to be affected more than the other.For example, mesial O.P.R. in maxillary first molars accounted for approximately 14 percent of all O.P.R. compared to approximately six percent by the distal surfaces of the same tooth (”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The average number of posterior teeth with proximal restorations per mouth increased with age from 1.53 at 18-24 years to 2.91 at 40-44 years; average number of restored posterior surfaces increased from 2.00 to 3.79.

    “The average number of posterior teeth and posterior tooth surfaces per mouth which had proximal restorations increased with age from 1.53 and 2.00 at 18 to 24 years to 2.91 and 3.79 at 40 to 44 years, respectively (Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Differences in gingivitis P.D.I. scores between overhang and homologue surfaces existed in 257 subjects, 136 in predicted direction; Wilcoxon T values were not significantly different from null (P=.20).

    “Differences existed in 257 subjects; 136 in the pre dicted direction of the O.P.R. score being higher than the homologue.Actual”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of 456 comparisons, differences in destructive periodontal disease P.D.I. scores between O.P.R. and homologue surfaces existed in 182 subjects, 114 in predicted direction; Wilcoxon T values were significantly different (P<0.001).

    “Of the 456 possible comparisons, differences in P.D.I, scores between O.P.R. and homologue surfaces existed in 182 subjects; 114 in the predicted direction of the O.P.R. score's being higher.Actual”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    32% of the 1,763 examined persons had one or more overhanging posterior dental restorations; 25% of males and 38% of females.

    “Thirty-two percent of the 1,763 persons who had been radiographically examined had one or more over hanging posterior dental restorations in their mouths; 25 percent of males and 38 percent of females (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of 40 subgroups, the proportion of restored teeth with a P.D.I. score of 5 or greater was higher than nonrestored teeth in 15 cells, lower in 16, tied in 6, and in 3 cells there were either no restored or no nonrestored teeth.

    “Of the 40 subgroups, the proportion of restored teeth with a P.D.I, score of 5 or greater was higher than nonrestored teeth in 15 cells, lower in 16, with 6 tied and in 3 cells there were either no restored or no nonrestored teeth.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    One third of all posterior teeth with proximal dental restorations and one quarter of all restored proximal surfaces had overhangs.

    “One third of all posterior teeth with proximal den tal restorations and one quarter of all restored proximal surfaces had overhangs (Table 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Overhanging Dental Restorations and Periodontal Disease by

    Some studies have reported an association between overhanging dental restorations and periodontal disease, but only the presence or absence of periodontal disease was reported.

    “Some studies have reported an association between overhanging dental restorations and periodontal dis ease; however, only the presence or absence of perio dontal disease was reported.5,6”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [5] 5. Wright, W. H.: Local Factors in Periodontal Disease. Dallas, Texas, Baylor University, College Dentistry, 1963, VII + 77 p. Thesis.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [6] 6. Alexander, A. G.: Periodontal Aspects of Conserva tive Dentistry. Brit. Dent. J., 125:111-4, Aug. 6, 1968.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The tenths and millimeter methods are equivocal and the method of measurements used in this study did not underestimate alveolar bone height.

    “The similarity of these estimations indicates that the tenths and milli meter methods are equivocal and that the method of measurements used in this study did not underestimate alveolar bone height.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Of the 1,976 persons examined, suitable sets of radiographs were obtained in 1,763.

    “Of the 1,976 persons who had been examined, suitable sets of radiographs were obtained in 1,763.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Examiner 1 diagnosed at least one O.P.R. in 315 subjects.

    “From the 970 sets of radiographs assigned to him, examiner 1 diagnosed at least one O.P.R. in each of 315 subjects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Comparison of P.D.I. scores was possible in 456 subjects.

    “Comparison of P.D.I, scores was possible in 456 sub jects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Overhanging restorations cause gingivitis.

    “It has been frequently stated that overhanging restora tions cause gingivitis.[1][2][3][4][5]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1][2][3][4][5]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • Rests on an assumption: Inflammatory periodontal disease is caused by local irritation.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Overhanging Dental Restorations and Periodontal Disease by

    Metal restorations with marginal excess equal to or greater than 0.2 mm had a highly significant reduction in alveolar bone height.

    “More recently, 9 a highly significant reduction in al veolar bone height was reported relative to metal resto rations with marginal excess equal to or greater than 0.2 mm.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [9] 9. Björn, Anna-Lisa, Björn, H. and Grkovic, B.: Mar ginal Fit of Restorations and Its Relation to Periodontal Bone Level. Part I: Metal Fillings. Odont. Revy, 20-311-21, 1969.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    A randomized selection of full mouth radiographs of the survey subjects was examined.

    “For the present radiographic assessment a randomized selection of full mouth radiographs of the survey sub jects was examined by one examiner”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    After initial calibration, each examiner examined a random selection of sets of radiographs twice, six weeks apart.

    “After initial calibration, each examiner ex amined a random selection of sets of radiographs twice, six weeks apart.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The original investigators attempted to secure a representative civilian sample of a New Mexican population aged 18 to 44 years.

    “The original investigators had attempted to secure a representative civilian sample of a New Mexican popu lation aged 18 to 44 years.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Differences in alveolar bone height between O.P.R. and homologue teeth could be computed from measurements in 208 subjects.

    “Differences in alveolar bone height, between O.P.R. and homologue teeth, could be computed from measurements in 208 of these subjects”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
22 of 22

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Inflammatory periodontal disease is caused by local irritation.

    “It is generally accepted that inflammatory periodontal disease is caused by local irritation.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The survey sample was representative of the New Mexican population aged 18 to 44 years.

    “The original investigators had attempted to secure a representative civilian sample of a New Mexican popu lation aged 18 to 44 years.”
2 of 2

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Excessively bulky or irregular restorations may contribute to periodontal issues by promoting bacterial plaque accumulation rather than causing mechanical irritation.

    “Research indicates that excessively bulky or irregular restorations may contribute to periodontal issues by promoting bacterial plaque accumulation rather than causing mechanical irritation.”

    From Prevalence of Proximal Overhangs in Class II Composite Restorations Placed by Undergraduate Students at Qassim University (2025) · cites this paper as [3]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports greater periodontal disease severity beside restorations with definite overhangs and suggests that marked overhangs may favor plaque accumulation. It also suggests some overhangs may not directly irritate the gingiva, but it does not establish plaque accumulation rather than mechanical irritation as the mechanism. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [3]3. Stahl, S. S.: The Etiology of Periodontal Disease- Review of Literature, p. 129-66. (In Ramfjord, S. P., Kerr, D. A. and Ash, M. M., eds. World Workshop in Periodon tics, Ann Arbor, Michigan, June 6-9, 1966.
  2. [4]4. Committee Report-The Etiology of Periodontal Dis ease, p. 170. (In Ramfjord, S. P., Kerr, D. A. and Ash, M. M., eds. World Workshop in Periodontics, Ann Arbor, Michigan, June 6-9, 1966.
  3. [11]11. Sheiham, Aubrey and Striffler, D. F.: A Comparison of Four Epidemiological Methods of Assessing Periodontal Disease: A Study Conducted on a New Mexican Popula tion. J. Periodont. Res. In press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gilmore, N., & Sheiham, A.
Affiliations
  • Tufts University (US)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
Venue
Journal of Periodontology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1971-01
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
8-12
ISSN
  • 0022-3492 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-3670
DOI
10.1902/jop.1971.42.1.8
OpenAlex
W1976710318
Cited by
108
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Journal of Periodontology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Dental materials and restorations
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Keywords
dental restorations, periodontal disease, gingivitis
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Dental Health Surveys, Dental Restoration, Permanent, Humans

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-11.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-11.

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