ArticlePolymers2023
In Vitro Comparison of Surface Roughness, Flexural, and Microtensile Strength of Various Glass-Ionomer-Based Materials and a New Alkasite Restorative Material.
Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Periodontal Evaluation for a New Alkasite Restorative Material in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Randomized-Controlled Clinical Trial.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2024Trial
- Performance of an alkasite restorative material under acidic conditions: surface roughness, gloss and hardness.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Flexural and Compressive Strengths of Bioactive Alkasite Compared to Other Ion-Releasing Restorative Materials.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effect of Immediate and Delayed Finishing and Polishing on the Surface Roughness and Microhardness of Alkasite and Giomer.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Review
- Influence of photodynamic and sonodynamic disinfection on the bond strength of caries-affected dentin bonded to three different tooth-colored restorative materials: A comparative study.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Assessment of flexural strength, diametral tensile strength and microhardness among Cention-N, resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and resin composite: AnBioinformation · 2025Article
- Mechanical Properties of Alkasite Material with Different Curing Modes and Simulated Aging Conditions.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- In Vitro Evaluation of Mechanical, Surface, and Optical Properties of Restorative Materials Applied with Different Techniques.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Mechanical Properties of Poly(Alkenoate) Cement Modified with Propolis as an Antiseptic.Polymers · 2023Article
- Shear bond strength between conventional composite resin and alkasite-based restoration used in sandwich technique: AnJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
- Long-term ion release, fluoride recharge, pH modulation, and mechanical aging of an experimental ACP-based composite compared with contemporary bioactive restorative materials.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the physical properties of Cention N and various glass-ionomer-based materials in vitro. The groups were obtained as follows: Group 1 (LC-Cent): light-cured Cention N; Group 2 (SC-Cent): self-cured Cention N; Group 3 (COMP): composite (3M Universal Restorative 200); Group 4 (DYRA): compomer (Dyract XP); Group 5 (LINER): Glass Liner; Group 6 (FUJI): FujiII LC Capsule; and Group 7 (NOVA): Nova Glass LC. For the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) test, 21 extracted human molar teeth were used. The enamel of the teeth was removed, and flat dentin surfaces were obtained. Materials were applied up to 3 mm, and sticks were obtained from the teeth. Additionally, specimens were prepared, and their flexural strength and surface roughness (Ra) were evaluated. Herein, data were recorded using SPSS 22.0, and the flexural strength, μTBS, and Ra were statistically analyzed. According to the surface roughness tests, the highest Ra values were observed in Group 6 (FUJI) (0.33 ± 0.1), whereas the lowest Ra values were observed in Group 2 (SC-Cent) (0.17 ± 0.04) (
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.