{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026854219948849106, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014492753623188406, 'mean_word_length': 4.9267676767676765, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On the Results of Clinical Studies

In the present clinical scenario a group of researchers try to answer by means of a retrospective cross-sectional study the following question: ‘Is the lack of an antagonist associated with overeruption of unopposed molars in adult patients?’. This question is of particular interest because molar elongation might lead to difficulties in prosthetic rehabilitation of the area, possibly requiring orthodontic intrusion of the molar; or might be associated with loss of periodontal attachment. The authors screened the clinical patient archives of a private practice in order to identify patients having at least one unopposed molar in the maxillary or the mandibular arch due to the loss of an antagonist. A blinded assessor measured from the patient dental casts the vertical distance of any unopposed molar(s) from the occlusal plane in a qualitative way as (i) no visible overeruption, (ii) overeruption up to 2 mm, and (iii) overeruption more than 2 mm. The assessor received only the plaster model of a single jaw in random order and therefore didn’t know to whether a molar had an antagonist or not. Eligible patients were then invited for a clinical examination and the clinical attachment levels of the includedmolars and their adjacent molar were measured with a periodontal probe as the distance between the cemento-enamel junction and the bottom of the periodontal pocket. Attachment loss measurements were categorised as (i) minor: up to 2.0 mm or (ii) severe: >2.0 mm. A total of 55 patients (39 women and 16 men) were included in the study with a mean age of 48 years and a total of 84 unopposed molars (59 upper/25 lower). After initial descriptive statistics, inferential statistics were used, including chi-square tests to see if molar overeruption categorisation differed between upper or lower molars and to see if molar overeruption was associated with clinical attachment loss. The authors reported that about 80% of unopposed molars had overerupted (50% up to 2 mm and 30% more than 2 mm) with upper molars being statistically more affected (P < 0.05). They also found that unopposed overerupted molars had lower clinical attachment levels than adjacent molars (P < 0.05), concluding that overeruption led to loss of clinical attachment. Which of the following statements is true, if any: