Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36110748›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2022

Comparative Evaluation of Compressive Strength and Flexural Strength of GC Gold Hybrid, GIC Conventional and Resin-modified Glass-ionomer Cement.

Shantun Malhotra, Kanwalpreet K Bhullar, Sumandeep Kaur, Mahima Malhotra, Rupam Kaur, Aashish Handa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Reinforcing bleached roots: A comparative study of intraorifice barriers.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026
    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
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.

Shantun MalhotraDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Kanwalpreet K BhullarDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Sumandeep KaurDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Mahima MalhotraDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Rupam KaurDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Aashish HandaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Amritsar, Punjab, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the study was to emphasize the compressive strength and flexural strength of glass-ionomer cement (GIC)-gold hybrid, conventional GIC, and resin-modified GIC (RMGIC). Methodology: Three GIC materials were used in the study: group A: GC-gold hybrid (Gold Label hybrid Universal Restorative), group B: type II conventional GIC, and group C: RMGIC. A total of 120 cylindrical test specimens of dimensions 4 mm diameter × 6 mm height were prepared from a custom-made Teflon mold according to respective study groups. The specimens prepared were then stored in 20 mL of deionized water at 37°C for 3 h daily for 30 days, and the solutions were changed every week, after which they were tested for compressive strength and flexural strength by using a universal force testing machine. All the results were analyzed by SPSS software and were subjected to statistical analysis using ANOVA followed by the Bonferroni Results: The mean compressive strength was the highest for group A and lowest for group B. Similarly, the mean flexural strength was the highest for group A and lowest for group B. Conclusion: The conclusions can be drawn from this

Indexed as

Conventional GICGC–gold hybridresin

Identifiers

PMID36110748
PMCPMC9469278

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.