🔗 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-D30972D49FAE
牙況： 患者求診時，曾經做過根管治療，但因上方無完整及良好的填補修復，理論上應要「Full Coverage」的修補，原始狀況牙齒與填補材有明顯溝隙，有細菌滲漏進入根管之可能。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 根管治療後缺乏完整良好填補修復、Full Coverage需求、牙齒與填補材間隙、細菌滲漏入根管的推論。
DNT-D2C6257ECB1D
主要治療方式： 在製作全新的補綴物前，先進行「顯微根管治療」-重新把根管清創乾淨，由於齒質結構本身剩餘非常少，扣除原本中心的樹脂填補材，剩餘牙齒結構過薄，若使用傳統牙套惑（360度）環形修磨的假牙，則會犧牲掉更多的牙齒結構，使得牙齒生命值再降低。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 決定性 gate 未通過；不得以檢索相似度或主題重疊升為可證明。
🗂 Related analyses (8)
🏛 View this clinic's IDA embassy →
server-rendered · verifiability = degree of literature support · idaeo-platform