Trial reportF1000Research2022
Single blind, randomized study comparing clinical equivalence of Trusilk
Trial report in F1000Research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Evaluation of Different Surgical Removal Techniques for Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Impactions: A Comparative Study.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Natural cellulose fibers derived from Dracaena angolensis (Welw. ex Carrière) Byng & Christenh. demonstrate potential as a non-absorbable surgical suture biomaterial.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evlaution of Different Suturing Techniques in Deep Third Molar Surgery: An Original Research.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Article
- Microbiological and Clinical Assessments of Suture Materials and Cyanoacrylate Application in Impacted Third Molar Surgeries: A Scoping Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
- Article
- Microbiological Retention on PTFE versus Silk Suture: A Quantitative Pilot Study in Third Molar Surgery.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.