ArticlePeerJ2023
An improved method for preparing stained ground teeth sections.
Article in PeerJ, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Assessment of Five Decalcification Methods for Human Dental Tissue: An Ex Vivo Laboratory Study.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Relationship of finger dermatoglyphics with ameloglyphics and their values as dental caries predictors in primary teeth.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of various direct pulp capping materials using different blood derivatives on disease-free tooth: A histopathological assessment case series.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Animal models and related techniques for dentin study.Odontology · 2025Review
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: In oral histopathology teaching and research, there is a need for high-quality undemineralized tooth sections that are easy to handle, have controlled thickness, allow the observation of intact microstructures, and can be preserved for long periods of time. Methods: Teeth were collected under non-demineralizing conditions. Tooth sections (15-25 µm) were prepared using a diamond knife, then randomly divided into three groups: (1) stained with rosin, (2) stained with hematoxylin and eosin, or (3) not stained. The prepared tooth sections were evaluated by microscopy for clarity and microstructure visibility. Results: The use of a diamond knife in the sectioning and grinding process yielded high-quality ground sections of teeth. Rosin-stained ground sections allowed better identification of microstructures within the teeth, compared with unstained or hematoxylin and eosin-stained ground sections. Conclusion: The best results were obtained in the ground sections of teeth that were stained with rosin. Ground sections of teeth prepared using this staining method could be useful in oral histopathology teaching and research.
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.