IMPORTANT: This assignment should be dividing in:
Part 1- Organise this literature into a Table showing a hierarchy of evidence. In a separate piece of text briefly justify your decisions referring to the Table. The best way to answer this is to provide a table as below:

Title of the paper Type of paper Journal

The type of paper refers to the type of writing or study it is and its purpose. Papers could be reporting the outcomes of original research (e.g. a randomised controlled trial). They could review existing evidence, as in a systematic review. However, some papers will not be focused on numerical evidence (e.g. a narrative literature review or reporting the author’s experience of utilising a treatment or device). While listing the papers, say why you think that it is of that type. For instance, if you have said that the paper reports a Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT), what are the features of the study that make it a RCT? Observational research (such as a cohort study) may be conducted as a retrospective or prospective study, which will have implications on the value of the paper. Consider the standing of the publication and whether or not articles are peer reviewed.
NB: Labels given to the study by the authors or journal such as Clinical Trial’ may be misleading; your classification of the study should come from your assessment of the study design as reported in the paper.

P.S.- Only 8 articles are required to be appraised this part and you should only work with 8 articles for the first part of the assignment, listed below (I had uploaded the articles, please see attachment):

1- Malchiodi, L.; Ghensi, P.; Cucchi, A.; Corrocher, G. (2011) A comparative retrospective Study of Immediately Loaded Implants in Postextraction Sites Versus Healed Sites: Results After 6 to 7 years in the Maxilla. The International Journal of Oral & Maxilofacial Implants, 26(2): 373-384

2- Bozini, T.; Petridis, H.; Tzanas, K.; Garefis, P. (2011) A Meta-Analysis of Prosthodontic Complication Rates of Implant-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses in Edentulous Patients After an Observation Period of at Least 5 Years. The International Journal of Oral & Maxilofacial Implants, 26(2): 304-318

3- Trammell, K.; Geurs, N. C.; O’neal, S. J.; Liu, P.; Haigh, S. J.; Mcneal, S.; Kenealy, J. N.; Reddy, M. S. (2009) A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Comparison of Platform-Switched and Matched- Abutment Implants in Short-Span Partial Denture Situations. The International Journal of Periodontics Restorative Dentistry, 29 (6): 599-605

4- Penarrocha-Diago, M.; Demarchi, C. L.; Maestre-Ferrin, L.; Carillo, C.; Penarrocha-Oltra, D.; Penarrocha-Diago, M. A. (2012) A Retrospective Comparison of 1,022 Implants: Immediate Versus Nonimmediate. The International Journal of Oral & Maxilofacial Implants, 27(2): 421-427

5- Romanos, G. E.; Nentwig, G. (2006) Immediate Versus Delayed Functional Loading of Implants in the Posterior Mandible: A 2-Year Prospective Clinical Study of 12 Consecutive Cases. The International Journal of Periodontics Restorative Dentistry, 26 (5): 459-469

6- Tarnow, D. P.; Chu, S. J. (2011) Human Histologic Verification of Osseointegration of an Immediate Implant Placed into a Fresh Extraction Socket With Excessive Gap Distance Without Primary Flap Closur, Graft, or Membrane: A Case Report. The International Journal of Periodontics Restorative Dentistry, 31 (5): 515-521

7- Atieh, M. A. A.; Atieh, A. H.; Payne, A. G. T.; Duncan, W. J. (2009) Immediate Loading with Single Implant Crowns: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. The International Journal of Prosthodontics, 22 (4): 378-387

8- Covani, U.; Marconcini, S.; Santini, S.; Cornelini, R.; Barone, A. (2010) Immediate Restoration of Single Implants Placed Immediately After Implant Removal. A Case Report. The International Journal of Periodontics Restorative Dentistry, 30 (6): 639-645
Part 2- As a discussion, CARRY OUT YOUR OWN LITERATURE SEARCH AND REVIEW THE THEME. Include your search strategy and SUGGEST TWO PAPERS YOU WOULD ADD to the current list giving the reasons for their selection. [discussion 4000 words]

When critically appraising papers to include in the list consider the PICO format when answering the question.
P Patient (problem): what is the concise description of the patient or the particular problem?
I Intervention: which main treatment is being considered?
C Comparison: is the treatment being considered against the best alternative or no treatment?
O Outcome: what are the main outcomes for the patient?

There are many checklists for critical appraisals (for example the CASP tools (available from www.phru.nhs.uk/pages/phd/resources.htm). While you will not be able to report every item of this form in detail, it should be clear from your assignment that a structured guide for appraisal has been used. The following Appendix contains Forms that you may find useful for Critical Appraisal of the literature. Remember that you must demonstrate that you have read around the subject by quoting references.

 
Publication
What is the source of the publication?
Is it a refereed source?
Introduction
The title should tell you clearly what the paper is about and be written in clear English.
Were the aims of the trial clearly stated?
Does the trial relate to general dental practice?
Is it an important problem?
Materials and Method
If a population was sampled how was the sample taken?
How large was the sample?
Does the sample represent the general population?
Were the groups that were compared similar at the start of the trial?
Was all the sample population accounted for at the end of the trial?
If not did this have any effect on the outcome of the trial?
Were patients and study personnel blind to the treatment?
Is the study properly controlled?
Was sufficient explanation given of the method so that the study could be repeated?
What was measured?
Are the appropriate indices valid e.g. DMF, DMFS etc?
Were the examiners trained and accurately calibrated?
Results
Are the results clearly explained with sufficient detail?
Are the tables easy to comprehensive and well annotated?
Do the tables or graphs accurately reflect the results?
Discussion and Conclusion
Are statements in the conclusion drawn from the results?
Do the results establish cause and effect?
Can the results be applied to general dental practice?
Is the final conclusion clear?
Were all clinically important outcomes considered?
References
Are the references up to date?
Are the references representative of the trial
ANY OTHER DETAILS- The assignment need to follow the Harvard Method, so after every paragraph or sentence the writer need to write the name of the author and the year.