Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28042259›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry

Comparison of compressive strength among three different intracanal post materials in primary anterior teeth: An

Nilavu Nilavarasan, R Hemalatha, R Vijayakumar, V S Hariharan

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Retention of Provisional Intraradicular Retainers Using Fiberglass Pins.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nilavu NilavarasanDepartment of Pedodontics, SRM Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
R HemalathaDepartment of Pedodontics, SRM Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
R VijayakumarDepartment of Pedodontics, SRM Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
V S HariharanDepartment of Pedodontics, SRM Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
SRM Dental College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of our study was to compare the fracture resistance and the mode of failure among three different post materials in primary anterior teeth. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of sixty extracted primary anterior teeth were selected for the study. The samples were divided into three groups of twenty teeth each: Group I (Ribbond), Group II (Omega loop), and Group III (Glass fiber post). Pulp therapy was followed by intracanal post and crown buildup. The samples were mounted in self-cure acrylic and subjected to compressive strength test using universal testing machine (Instron). The maximum force at which the tooth fractured was recorded.

resultsThe values were subjected to one-way analysis of variance. The mean compressive strength values of Ribbond, omega loop, and glass fiber post were found to be 83.25 N, 61.60 N, and 75.55 N, respectively. The

conclusionGroup I (Ribbond) showed the highest fracture resistance values followed by Group III (Glass fiber post) and Group II (Omega loop). Although there is difference in mean values, they were nonsignificant.

Indexed as

Intracanal postprimary teethRibbond

Identifiers

PMID28042259
PMCPMC5166300
OpenAlexW2559870070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.