ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Clinical Outcomes and Quantitative Margin Analysis of a Universal Adhesive Using a Randomized Clinical Trial over Three Years.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prospective, randomized, paired-comparison clinical trial of a new universal adhesive in posterior composite restorations: A 2-year evaluation.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- From Classical Enamel/Dentin Bonding to Self-Adhesive Composites: A Narrative Review of Current Clinical Aspects.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Universal Adhesive Brands Functional Performance in Non-Carious Cervical Lesions: 18- to 48-Months Systematic Clinical Report.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- The Influence of Adhesive Strategy, Type of Dental Composite, and Polishing Time on Marginal Gap Formation in Class I-like Cavities.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Effect of the Adhesive Strategy on Clinical Performance and Marginal Integrity of a Universal Adhesive in Non-Carious Cervical Lesions in a Randomized 36-Month Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The effectiveness of a universal adhesive applied in different application modes for the preparation of Class V composite restorations was evaluated both clinically and by quantitative marginal analysis (QMA). In each of the 22 patients, four non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) were restored with Filtek
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.