ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2023
The Effect of Bonding Surface Design on Shear Bond Strength of 3D-Printed Orthodontic Attachments.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Microhardness and Chemical Composition of Different Ceramic Self-Ligating Brackets: AnDentistry journal · 2025Article
- Multibraided Fixed Retainers with Different Diameters after Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): In Vitro Study Investigating Temperature Changes and Bonding Efficacy.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study compared the shear bond strength (SBS) of four innovative designs of the bonding surface of 3D-printed orthodontic attachments with conventional mesh design. Methods: In this in vitro study, the bonding surface design in different groups was as follows: Group 1, flat surface without any feature as a negative control; Group 2, concentric circles with no cuts; Group 3, concentric circles with 16 radial cuts; Group 4, concentric circles with 32 radial cuts; Group 5, small cones with a flat end and rounded edges; Group 6, mesh-based commercially available metal brackets of the maxillary central incisor (standard edgewise, Dentaurum®) as a positive control ( Results: The mean SBS was significantly different between all the groups ( Conclusion: The bonding surface design significantly influenced the SBS of orthodontic attachments. The concentric circles with 32 cuts had higher bond strength than other designs and can be suggested as a new bonding surface design for orthodontic attachments.
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.