ArticleContemporary clinical dentistry
An
Article in Contemporary clinical dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Marginal Quality and Wear of Bulk-fill Materials for Class-II Restorations in Primary Molars.The journal of adhesive dentistry · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMicroleakage is one of the most frequently encountered problems in posterior tooth-colored restorations. Efforts to decrease this problem with resin restorations include techniques for reducing the ratio of bonded to unbonded restoration surfaces and following strategic incremental placement techniques to reduce residual stress at tooth-restoration interface which reduces the C-factor, hence microleakage.
aimThe present study aimed to evaluate microleakage associated with three placement techniques for compomer restorations in primary molars. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY: This
resultsNearly 86.6% of the specimens presented with microleakage involving the entire axial wall and pulpal floor in the bulk-fill group, whereas 56.6% and 46.6% of the specimens in the horizontal-incremental and oblique-incremental groups showed microleakage up to two-third and one-third of the axial walls, respectively. A significant difference in scores was observed between groups (
conclusionMicroleakage was observed with all the three techniques but was comparatively lower with the incremental placement techniques. The oblique-incremental technique offered the least microleakage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.