Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33889345›Full record

ArticleDental research journal

Fracture resistance of pulpotomized and composite-restored primary molars: Incremental versus bulk-fill techniques.

Masoud Fallahinejad Ghajari, Amir Ghasemi, Arash Yousefi Moradi, Khashayar Sanjari

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Masoud Fallahinejad GhajariDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Science, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Amir GhasemiDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Arash Yousefi MoradiDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental School, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.
Khashayar SanjariDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental School, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran.
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRArak University of Medical Sciences · IRKermanshah University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to assess the fracture resistance of pulpotomized primary molars restored with incremental and bulk-fill composite application techniques. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this

resultsThe mean fracture resistance was 1291.47 ± 603.88 N in the amalgam, 1283.08 ± 594.57 N in the Tetric N-Ceram incremental, and 1939.06 ± 134.47 N in the Tetric N-Ceram bulk-fill group. The difference in this regard between Group 3 and Groups 1 and 2 was statistically significant (

conclusionBulk-fill composite is recommended for reinforcing the remaining tooth structure after the primary molar pulpotomy procedure. Time-saving characteristics of this material are clinically important for reducing appointment time for children.

Indexed as

Bulk-fill compositeconventional compositefracture resistanceprimary molarpulpotomy

Identifiers

PMID33889345
PMCPMC8045525
OpenAlexW3112834060

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.