ArticleDental research journal
Evaluation of the effectiveness of fluoridated and non-fluoridated desensitizing agents in dentinal tubule occlusion using scanning electron microscopy. An in-vitro study.
Article in Dental research journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- pH- and calcium-dependent solution-phase free fluoride in dental desensitizing gels: a preliminary in vitro study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Polyaspartic Acid-Calcium-Lanthanum Complexes Induce Antibacterial Remineralization of Dentin and In-Depth Occlusion of Dentinal Tubules.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- The Effect of Toothpastes Containing Hydroxyapatite, Fluoroapatite, and Zn-Mg-hydroxyapatite Nanocrystals on Dentin Hypersensitivity: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
- Evaluation of dentinal tubule occlusion by Fluoridated and Non-fluoridated Bioactive Glass and Propolis desensitizers by scanning electron microscopy.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDentin hypersensitivity is primarily caused due to patent or exposed dentinal tubules. Nonfluoridated-desensitizing agents deposit hydroxycarbonate apatite (HCA), within the dentinal tubules, thereby relieving hypersensitivity. Fluoride-containing bioactive glass-based agents form fluorapatite which is less soluble when compared to hydroxyapatite and HCA. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this
resultsGroup 1 demonstrated better tubule occlusion in comparison with Group 2 and a statistically significant difference when compared to Group 3 (
conclusionAll desensitizing agents showed satisfactory dentinal tubule occlusion. While fluoridated bioactive glass demonstrated better occlusion immediately after application, Bioactive glass showed better resistance to acid treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32774796PMC7386371W3027750678What 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.