🔗 IDA SENTENCE ANALYSIS
Sentence-by-sentence verification
0
Provable
2
Partly supported
9
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 (11 statements)
DNT-CDB63B972074
中和板橋植牙權威 -康橋牙醫診所表示，要想恢復外型與咬合，現今有著不少假牙方式可供大家填補，其中植牙是大眾最普遍的選擇，牙橋則是其次選項。
◐ Partly supported (scope noted below)
Supported scope: 單一嚴重外傷病例中，植牙被用於恢復口腔功能與改善外觀；未支持普及率或機構說法。
DNT-668EF71CA339
牙橋的原理及安裝過程報您知 牙橋可以使用多久？
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 牙橋的原理、安裝過程及可使用的具體年限
DNT-A7BCFB010BD0
因為不需手術，自然不需要傷口癒合時間，讓人短時間內就能藉由牙橋恢復咬合與咀嚼。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 「不需手術、無傷口癒合時間、短時間經牙橋恢復咬合與咀嚼」等全部主張
DNT-33F9AC8C2C65
牙橋尤其重視支柱牙與齒槽骨健康，當兩側牙齒保養得好，齒槽骨也沒有萎縮的情況下，牙橋就能穩固使用。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 牙橋的支柱牙與齒槽骨健康、兩側牙齒保養良好、齒槽骨無萎縮即可穩固使用等核心主張均未在 evidence 中出現。
DNT-0B3B9C7052FC
牙橋壽命平均來說可達5-10年，使用年限落差大的原因主要來自齒槽骨萎縮速率、清潔方式兩大因素。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 牙橋平均5-10年壽命，以及齒槽骨萎縮速率與清潔方式為主要變因
DNT-25EE2D76F18F
影響牙橋壽命因素： 1.齒槽骨萎縮速率：牙橋的構造由牙冠相連而成，沒有人工牙根。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 牙橋壽命因素、齒槽骨萎縮速率、牙橋構造由牙冠相連且無人工牙根等均未在 evidence 中出現。
DNT-B29E10F20C4D
2.牙橋正確清潔：牙橋為多顆假牙連成一體，牙橋底部容易卡著食物殘渣與牙菌斑，若沒有使用特製牙線、牙間刷每日仔細清潔，更加容易形成蛀牙，對支柱牙造成侵害。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 『牙橋為多顆假牙連成一體』、『底部卡食物殘渣與牙菌斑』、『需特製牙線/牙間刷』、『清潔不足會蛀牙並侵害支柱牙』均無證據。
DNT-44268229A313
一旦兩側牙齒蛀牙嚴重，也意味著牙橋不再密合，需要重新製作了。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 兩側牙齒蛀牙嚴重、牙橋不再密合及需要重新製作等因果關係，均未被證據提及。
DNT-6C6EB5A5F87B
植牙既能做到如同真牙般的咀嚼力，還有著人工牙根，能夠維持齒槽骨不萎縮。
◐ Partly supported (scope noted below)
Supported scope: 單一個案中，該患者植牙後多年無骨吸收且無功能問題
DNT-D08F68A6E28E
更因為有著單顆結構，清潔維護上比起牙橋更加容易，也不會連帶影響其他顆牙齒的健康，是目前最多人選用的假牙方式。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 整句 claim 均未被證據支持：單顆結構、清潔比牙橋容易、不影響其他牙齒健康、最多人選用等皆無記載。
DNT-6D77A002858B
只要患者缺牙處兩旁擁有健康完好的牙齒，就適合安裝牙橋。
○ Pending (insufficient evidence; no claim of support)
10 candidate paper(s) examined; evidence insufficient to support this statement; still needed: 缺牙處兩旁牙齒健康即適合安裝牙橋的適應症宣稱未被支持
🗂 Related analyses (8)
🏛 View this clinic's IDA embassy →
server-rendered · verifiability = degree of literature support · idaeo-platform