🔗 IDA SENTENCE ANALYSIS
第一個病例是曾做過「植牙 + 固定牙橋 — sentence-by-sentence verification
0
Provable
0
Partly supported
3
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 (3 statements)
DNT-1902377E5DCC
第一個病例是曾做過「植牙 + 固定牙橋」復建治療的中年女性病患，在植體鬆動而對植牙再復建失去信心後，轉而改接受對顎骨較無侵犯性的本治療：經挑選適當的殘餘牙齒或牙根作為支柱牙後，在其上黏合具有可被磁石吸附的鈀銀不鏽鋼合金平台帽；而覆蓋式義齒內裝對應磁石，即可吸附在口腔內。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: claim 描述中年女性病患的植牙與固定牙橋失敗史、磁吸式覆蓋式義齒的具體設計與治療過程，evidence 完全未提及。
DNT-F694B0D618F6
第二個病例為老年的男性病患，因長年罹患糖尿病，雖經多位醫師建議拔除口腔內的眾多殘根以做全口義齒復建，仍主觀排拒而始終未接受任何治療；直至79歲始嘗試接受本治療：將眾多殘根分做「作磁吸帽支柱牙」或「直接以複合樹脂充填、修整至與齒槽骨塉齊平」之兩處理，不拔除任何殘根；治療完成四年來，其義齒使用狀況於今仍良好，殘根也未見有任何敗壞(此病患已同意於此次大會桌面展示出席)。
○ 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。
DNT-D6152729A6AD
相對於植牙式的可撤式義齒，以及其它支柱牙易遭橫向力量破壞的可撤式義齒，只要口腔中尚有狀況不致太差的殘根或殘牙，隱形磁吸覆蓋式義齒可在「避免齒槽骨侵入性手術、治療期間較短、義齒壽命較長、外貌美觀、較為病患接受」的諸多表現上，提供病患不錯的選擇。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: claim 比較隱形磁吸覆蓋式義齒與植牙式義齒的優劣，強調避免手術、治療時間短、壽命長、美觀及病患接受度，evidence 未提及此類比較。
🗂 Related analyses (3)
🏛 View this clinic's IDA embassy →server-rendered · verifiability = degree of literature support · idaeo-platform