ArticleClinical oral implants research2026
Consensus Report of Group 3 of the 1st Global Consensus for Clinical Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of the Edentulous Maxilla: Advanced Diagnostic Imaging, Augmentation Techniques, and Management of Complications.
Article in Clinical oral implants research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 1st Global Consensus for Clinical Guidelines: Identifying a Core Outcome Set for Implant Dentistry in Edentulous Maxilla Rehabilitation.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe 1st Global Consensus for Clinical Guidelines (GCCG) in Implant Dentistry introduced an evidence-based, patient-centered framework for rehabilitating the edentulous maxilla. Working Group 3 aimed to develop clinical recommendations on advanced diagnostic imaging, soft and hard tissue augmentation, and management of complications. MATERIALS AND
methodsRecommendations were developed following the S2k-level guideline framework of the AWMF and a structured nominal group technique. The evidence base included two systematic reviews on clinician-reported outcomes (ClinROs) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), supplemented by single-round international surveys of expert clinicians, patients, and cross-disciplinary experts. Survey content addressed diagnostics, treatment planning, clinical procedures, and maintenance care. Draft recommendations were discussed at the in-person consensus meeting in Boston (June 16-18, 2025) and finalized through anonymous plenary voting. Consensus thresholds were predefined as ≥ 75% but ≤ 95% agreement for consensus and > 95% agreement for strong consensus.
resultsWorking Group 3 formulated four clinical recommendations spanning advanced diagnostic imaging, augmentation techniques, and complication management. All four recommendations reached consensus. Voting participation per recommendation ranged from 68 to 88 (mean 79) out of a possible 105 participants.
conclusionsThe Working Group 3 consensus statements offer practical guidance on surgical procedures and complication management in the rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla. These recommendations are grounded in current evidence, interdisciplinary clinical practice, and patient perspectives. Furthermore, important evidence gaps, particularly in standardized patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), long-term outcomes, and maintenance protocols, highlight key priorities for future clinical research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.