ArticleJournal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials2022
Mechanical characterization and adhesive properties of a dental adhesive modified with a polymer antibiotic conjugate.
Article in Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study is a follow up investigation on recent work by our group demonstrating synthesis, release and strong antibacterial character of resins modified with penicillin V (PV)-based polymer-antibiotic conjugates (PACs). Here, we aimed to evaluate the mechanical, bonding, and other relevant biomedical properties of a commercial adhesive resin modified with PV-PAC. Single Bond Plus (SB+) was modified with PAC containing 1.8 wt% conjugated PV. Adhesive resins were bonded to dentin from extracted human molars and restorative resin added. Beams of cross-sectional area of 0.9 ± 0.1 mm (Kutsch and Young, 2011) (n = 20) were obtained from the molars and tested for micro-tensile bond strength (μTBS) at 24 h and 4 months. For cohesive strength, hourglass beams (10 × 2 × 1 mm; n = 10) were assessed for ultimate tensile strength (UTS), beam-shaped specimens (25x2x2 mm; n = 10) evaluated for flexural strength and modulus (FS/FM) via three-point bending, and cylindrical specimens (3 × 2 mm; n = 10) assessed for ultimate compressive strength (UCS). For surface micro-hardness (MH), cylindrical specimens (3 × 2 mm; n = 6) were assessed before and after an EtOH challenge. The degree of conversion (DC) (5 × 1 mm; n = 6) was determined based on changes in absorbance ratio between peaks at ∼1637 cm
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.