ArticleBiological trace element research2024
Mercury Concentration in Saliva and the Impact of Chewing: An Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry Study.
Article in Biological trace element research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of metal ion retention in tooth structure following the removal of dental amalgam restorations: an ex vivo study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Exploring saliva as a biofluid for biomonitoring of diet-related contaminants exposure: insights from a literature mining approach.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026Review
- Dental Amalgam and Oral Biological Responses: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Formulation Consideration of Medicated Chewing Gum: A Review.Recent advances in drug delivery and formulation · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mercury, which is found in dental amalgams, is considered to be the most toxic non-radioactive element. However, the health policies of different countries have not reached a consensus on the use and safety of amalgam. This study aims to investigate the effect of amalgam restorations on mercury concentration in saliva, as well as the effect of restoration number, surface number, and chewing on this concentration. A total of 86 participants were included in this study (an equal number for the study and control groups). The number of amalgam restorations and their surfaces were recorded. While both unstimulated and stimulated saliva were collected from the study group, only unstimulated saliva was collected from the control group. The effect of chewing on mercury concentration was examined in the study group with unstimulated and stimulated saliva specimens using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry device. Mercury concentration in the unstimulated saliva was found to be higher in the study group compared to the control group (p= 0.000). As the number of amalgam restorations and the number of amalgam restoration surfaces increased, the mercury concentration in the saliva increased (p= 0.015 and p= 0.021, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference between mercury levels in the unstimulated saliva and the stimulated saliva (p=0.316). Chewing presented an insignificant difference in mercury concentration. Given this surprising result, the effect of chewing on mercury concentrations should be explored more extensively in future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37632686What 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.