ArticleJournal of periodontal & implant science2017
Comparison of periodontitis-associated oral biofilm formation under dynamic and static conditions.
Article in Journal of periodontal & implant science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomaterial-mediated macrophage polarization remodeling and sequential regulation: a potential strategy in bone infections treatment.Bone research · 2025Review
- Classical and Modern Models for Biofilm Studies: A Comprehensive Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The effect of dental material type and masticatory forces on periodontitis-derived subgingival microbiomes.Biofilm · 2024Article
- Selenium Nanoparticle Activity againstPharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Understanding the Influence of Rheology on Biofilm Adhesion and Implication for Food Safety.International journal of food science · 2024Review
- Evaluating models and assessment techniques for understanding oral biofilm complexity.MicrobiologyOpen · 2023Review
- Article
- The Current Antimicrobial and Antibiofilm Activities of Synthetic/Herbal/Biomaterials in Dental Application.BioMed research international · 2022Review
- Relevance of Biofilm Models in Periodontal Research: From Static to Dynamic Systems.Microorganisms · 2021Review
- Implication of Surface Properties, Bacterial Motility, and Hydrodynamic Conditions on Bacterial Surface Sensing and Their Initial Adhesion.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Review
- At the Interface of Materials and Microbiology: A Call for the Development of Standardized Approaches to Assay Biomaterial-Biofilm Interactions.Journal of dental research · 2019Article
- Antibacterial, Hydrophilic Effect and Mechanical Properties of Orthodontic Resin Coated with UV-Responsive Photocatalyst.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Characterization of Antibiofilm and Antimicrobial Effects ofJournal of evidence-based integrative medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the characteristics of single- and dual-species
methodsHydroxyapatite (HA) disks, 12.7 mm in diameter and 3 mm thick, were coated with processed saliva for 4 hours. The disks were divided into a static method group and a dynamic method group. The disks treated with a static method were cultured in 12-well plates, and the disks in the dynamic method group were cultured in a Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) biofilm reactor for 72 hours. In the single- and dual-species biofilms,
resultsCompared with the biofilms made using the static method, the biofilms made using the dynamic method had significantly lower amounts of adhering and looser bacterial accumulation in SEM and CLSM images. The proportion of
conclusionsWhen used to reproduce periodontal biofilms composed of
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.