Direct answer
This glossary defines the core terms used to evaluate dental implant evidence. The most important distinction is between an implant remaining in place (survival) and the implant-restoration system meeting broader biological, mechanical, functional, esthetic, and patient-centered criteria (success). Study design and uncertainty determine how far either result can be generalized.
Key takeaways
- Outcome definitions should be read before the percentage.
- Confidence intervals describe precision; prediction intervals estimate variability across settings.
- Bias is a systematic distortion, not simply dishonesty.
- Statistical significance does not automatically mean clinical importance.
Outcome terms
- Survival
- The implant or restoration remains present at a defined time.
- Success
- A broader endpoint using specified health, function, tissue, radiographic, technical, esthetic, or patient criteria.
- Failure
- An event defined by the study, often implant removal or loss, but sometimes restoration remake.
- Complication
- An adverse biological or technical event that may occur without failure.
Study-design terms
- Prospective cohort
- A defined group is followed forward under a protocol.
- Retrospective study
- Existing records and outcomes are analyzed after care occurred.
- Randomized controlled trial
- Participants or sites are allocated by chance to reduce selection bias in comparison.
- Systematic review
- A reproducible search, selection, and appraisal of studies answering a focused question.
- Meta-analysis
- A statistical pooling of compatible study results.
Statistics and uncertainty
- Confidence interval
- A range expressing precision around an estimated effect under stated assumptions.
- Prediction interval
- A range estimating where an effect from a future comparable setting may fall.
- Relative risk / odds ratio
- Relative measures comparing event occurrence; neither directly states one patient’s absolute chance.
- Heterogeneity
- Variation among study results, populations, devices, methods, or outcomes.
Quality and applicability
- Risk of bias
- The possibility that design or conduct systematically distorted the result.
- Confounding
- A third factor influences both exposure and outcome, complicating causal interpretation.
- Certainty of evidence
- Confidence that the effect estimate is close enough to the truth for the question.
- Applicability
- How well the studied patients, system, indication, and setting match the decision at hand.
Selected references
- EQUATOR Network. Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research.
- Papaspyridakos P, et al. Success criteria in implant dentistry: a systematic review. Journal of Dental Research. 2012. doi:10.1177/0022034511431252.