ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2023
Evaluation of the Effect of Nanographene Oxide on Microleakage of Conventional and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the Impact of Nano-Graphene Oxide Addition on Surface Microhardness and Roughness of Glass Ionomer Cements: A Laboratory Study.International journal of dentistry · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: One of the important features of the restorative materials is the ability to seal and prevent the microleakage. Glass ionomer cement (GIC) still exhibits some microleakage despite establishing a chemical bond to the tooth. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of nanographene oxide (nGO) on the microleakage of conventional (CGIC) and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC). Methods: Thirty intact extracted molars were used. Class V cavities were prepared on their buccal and lingual surfaces. The samples randomly divided into two main groups of CGIC and RMGIC; each of them was randomly subdivided into three subgroups, including the group without nGO (control), the group with 1% nGO, and the group with 2% nGO. After restoring the cavities, they were subjected to thermocycling (1,000 cycles at 5/55°C). Two percent basic fuchsin solution was used to perform the microleakage test, and then the sectioned samples were examined by a stereomicroscope 40x. Kruskal-Wallis test, Dunn's test, and Mann-Whitney Results: Group CGIC + 1% nGO at the gingival margin and group RMGIC + 1% nGO at both gingival and occlusal margins had significantly less microleakage than their control groups ( Conclusions: The addition of 1% nGO significantly reduced the gingival microleakage of CGIC and the occlusal and the gingival microleakage of RMGIC, while the addition of 2% nGO did not cause a significant reduction in microleakage.
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.