Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31827652›Full record

ReviewThe Japanese dental science review2020

The microtensile bond strength test: Its historical background and application to bond testing.

Hidehiko Sano, Abu Faem Mohammad Almas Chowdhury, Pipop Saikaew, Mariko Matsumoto, Shuhei Hoshika, Monica Yamauti

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Japanese dental science review, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 127 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hidehiko SanoDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Kita 13, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8586, Japan.
Abu Faem Mohammad Almas ChowdhuryDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Kita 13, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8586, Japan.
Pipop SaikaewDepartment of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, 6 Yothi Road, Rajthewee, Bangkok 10400, Thailand.
Mariko MatsumotoDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Kita 13, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8586, Japan.
Shuhei HoshikaDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Kita 13, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8586, Japan.
Monica YamautiDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Kita 13, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8586, Japan.
Hokkaido University · JPMahidol University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microtensile bond strength (μTBS) test was introduced in 1994. Since then, it has been utilized profoundly across many bond strength testing laboratories, making it currently one of the most standard and versatile bond strength test. Although it is a static and strength-based method, together with the morphological and spectroscopic investigations, it has been contributing immensely in the advancement of dentin adhesive systems. μTBS test has a greater discriminative capability than the traditional macro-shear bond test. During the early stage of its development, the authors predicted that this testing method would enable evaluation of the adhesive performances of resins to excavated carious or sclerotic dentin and the regional bond strengths of various portions of the cavity. In addition, they also stated the possibility of comparing the long-term stability of resin adhesion at various portions of the cavity walls on teeth extracted at various times after insertion of bonded restorations. In this review, we discussed the historical background, inception and the application of the μTBS test and proposed directions for further improvement of this testing method.

Indexed as

AdhesionCaries-affected dentinMicrotensile bond strength testMinimal interventionResin compositeSclerotic dentin

Identifiers

PMID31827652
PMCPMC6888711
OpenAlexW2995836297

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.