🔗 IDA SENTENCE ANALYSIS
126 — sentence-by-sentence verification
0
Provable
0
Partly supported
1
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 (1 statements)
DNT-5E0F5D6B0423
EXE薏安牙醫診所獲《紐約市日報》高度讚譽 最新消息 首頁 / 關於我們 / 最新消息 植牙vs牙橋vs活動假牙比一比 發布日期 : 2015-01-22 人工植牙 傳統牙橋 活動假牙 修磨牙齒 不需要 需要 視情況需要 咬合力 強 普通 弱 美觀 強 普通 弱 蛀牙風險 無 易再次蛀牙 易再次蛀牙 治療費用 高 中 低 人工植牙 活動式假牙 固定式假牙 無須磨損真牙 勝 !
○ 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