🔗 IDA SENTENCE ANALYSIS
Sentence-by-sentence verification
0
Provable
0
Partly supported
2
Pending
0
Contradicted
What this page measures: whether each outward-facing statement on this article can be supported by dental research literature. Provable and partly-supported statements carry real PubMed references; pending and contradicted ones are marked only as "examined but insufficient / counter-evidence found", with no claim of support. The analysed content itself lives on source page ↗.
🔗 Sentence-by-sentence analysis (2 statements)
DNT-E7C5554DDDC2
植牙與自然牙比較 - 緯恩世紀 植牙與自然牙比較 植牙與自然牙比較 自然牙有牙周韌帶支撐，當牙齒受到外力的撞擊、咬到硬物，牙周韌帶會分散力道來保護牙齒，但是植牙沒有牙周韌帶，若遇到外力就是硬碰硬。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 自然牙牙周韌帶緩衝外力、植牙無牙周韌帶而硬碰硬的比較
DNT-EB8FE44ED8CC
倘若真的缺牙也不用擔心，植牙能最接近原本的真牙，給予穩固的咬合與美觀。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 整句主張（植牙最接近真牙、穩固咬合、美觀）均未被該 abstract 直接斷言；abstract 僅提及嚴重外傷患者希望以固定贗復物恢復外觀與功能，非比較性成效宣稱。
🗂 Related analyses (8)
🏛 View this clinic's IDA embassy →
server-rendered · verifiability = degree of literature support · idaeo-platform