1. What data in particular will be shared?
   Response - Individual participant data that underlie the results reported in this article, after de-identification (text, tables, figures, and appendices).
   


2. What additional supporting information will be shared?
   Response -  Study Protocol
   Response -  Statistical Analysis Plan
   Response - Informed Consent Form
   Response - Clinical Study Report
   
   
3. Who will be able to view these files?
   Response - Researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal.
   


4. For what types of analyses will this data be available?
   Response - To achieve aims in the approved proposal.
   


5. By what mechanism will data be made available?
   Response - Proposals should be directed to [gummeshivangini@gmail.com].
   


6. For how long will this data be available start date provided 01-12-2024 and end date provided 01-12-2029?
   Response - Immediately following publication. No end date.
   


7. Any URL or additional information regarding plan/policy for sharing IPD? 
   Additional Information - NIL

Implant retained overdentures have now become the choice of treatment for removable complete overdenture. Implants such as mini-implants and conventional implants have been used to stabilize the mandibular overdenture. (Weerapan et al 2016). Diabetes Mellitus is a metabolic disorder and considered a relative risk for dental implant therapy. As there is delayed wound and bone healing and compromised immunity among diabetic patients, many of them are denied the benefits of dental implant therapy (Yadav et al. 2018). 2-piece Mini-implants are often being recommended because of their reduced diameter (<3.0 mm) which enables insertion in narrow ridges. Mini-implants are also interesting from an economic perspective, due to their reduced cost compared with standard fixtures and lower operative time needed (Griffitts et al. 2005).Systematic reviews evaluating the clinical viability of single implants retaining overdentures concluded that their survival and patient satisfaction increased even with a single implant retaining the overdenture (Batista et al 2019). Based on the data available, crestal bone loss is affected by implant design, formation of biologic width, implant design, implant surface, insertion depth, platform switching, postsurgical manipulation and micro gap and stability between the implant and abutment (Maier, F.M. 2016). There have been various studies on the number of dental implants used to stabilize the denture but there has been limited studies regarding the comparison between a 2-piece single conventional and mini implant for a mandibular overdenture used in diabetic individuals. Such a treatment is more cost-effective and affordable for patients. Hence, there’s a need for this study.

Aim of the study: The aim of the study is to evaluate the crestal bone loss and the patient satisfaction between Conventional and Mini single implant supported mandibular overdenture

Objectives of the study:1. To assess the crestal bone loss around the conventional and mini single implant supported mandibular overdenture. 2. To assess the patient satisfaction for conventional and mini single implant supported overdenture.

Methodology: 22 participants satisfying the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria will be selected for this study. The participants will be randomly assigned into two groups (Group A – Conventional implant and Group B – Mini implant). Each group will have 11 participants; a single implant will be placed in symphysis of the mandible. Conventional loading protocol will be followed after 3 months. Crestal bone loss will be assessed with CBCT at mesial, distal, buccal, lingual sites immediately after implant placement, 3^rd month (loading), and 9^th month from implant placement. Patient satisfaction will be evaluated with a questionnaire at the end of 9^th month.