Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37915313›Full record

ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research

Evaluation of

Paweena Kongkon, Wiwat Pichayakorn, Sasiwimol Sanohkan

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Paweena KongkonDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90112, Thailand.
Wiwat PichayakornDepartment of Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90112, Thailand.
Sasiwimol SanohkanDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90112, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: This study developed a new skin-deproteinized natural rubber latex (DNRL) silicone adhesive for adhering to silicone prostheses and compared the properties with a commercial Daro-Hydrobond adhesive. Materials and methods: The new DNRL skin adhesive formulation was made from non-vulcanized natural rubber-based adhesives consisting of DNRL, 20% polyvinyl alcohol, cumarone resin, 2% methylcellulose, and Wingstay L. The peel bond strength of the adhesives was tested using a 90-degree peel test. Biocompatibility was accessed using i Results: The peel bond strength of the new DNRL skin adhesive was 103.61 ± 23.18 N/m whereas that of the Daro-hydrobond adhesive was 131.52 ± 21.72 N/m. There was no significant difference ( Conclusion: The new DNRL skin adhesive showed comparable peel bond strength and patient satisfaction to those of commercial adhesives. The adhesive was biocompatible and can be used carefully.

Indexed as

Deproteinized natural rubber latex adhesiveMaxillofacial prosthesesSilicone prosthesesSkin adhesive

Identifiers

PMID37915313
PMCPMC10616549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.