ReviewIranian endodontic journal2021
Physicomechanical Properties of Tertiary Monoblock in Endodontics: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in Iranian endodontic journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping risk of bias criteria in systematic reviews of in vitro endodontic studies: an umbrella review.Evidence-based dentistry · 2025Pooled it
- Superiority of Warm Vertical Condensation in C-shaped root canals: improved periodontal health, enhanced fracture resistance, with reduced pain and secondary caries incidence.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Effect of Obturation Techniques on the Quality of Root Canal Fillings: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis ofIranian endodontic journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the physicomechanical properties of tertiary monoblock obturation with different obturation techniques. Methods and Materials: PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, LILACS, IBECS, and BBO were searched time. PICO question was: "In extracted human teeth (Population), does tertiary monoblock obturation (Intervention) have superior physicomechanical properties (Outcome) compared to conventional obturation systems (Comparison)?". Statistical analyses for push-out bond strength were performed with RevMan software by comparing the mean differences of each study, with a 95% confidence interval. Inverse variance was used as statistical method, random-effects models as analysis model, and heterogeneity between studies was assessed by Cochran's Q test and I Results: Of 2162 studies retrieved, 31 were included in this review for "Study Characteristics". Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis demonstrated that conventional obturation had significantly higher push-out bond strength than tertiary monoblock obturation ( Conclusion: Tertiary monoblock systems have a push-out bond strength similar to conventional systems when used with warm vertical compaction.
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.