ArticleTheScientificWorldJournal2024
In Vitro Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of Cention N and Its Comparison with Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) Restorative Material as Used in Primary Teeth.
Article in TheScientificWorldJournal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Mechanical and Surface Properties of Glass Ionomer, Resin-modified Glass Ionomer, and Alkasite Restorative Materials.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Bioactive restorative materials in dentistry: a comprehensive review of mechanisms, clinical applications, and future directions.Odontology · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Clinical Performance of Alkasite Restorative Materials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Bioactive and Ion-releasing materials in minimum intervention dentistry: a clinical pathway from prevention to restorative treatment.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- In vitro assessment of cytotoxic, genotoxic, and antimicrobial properties of pediatric restorative dental materials.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of Three Different Restorative Materials in Primary Molar Teeth: AnInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Shear Bond Strength and Enamel Effects of Bioactive Composite Attachments for Clear Aligners.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Review
- The impact of CENTION-N compared to glass-ionomer cement on shear bond strength and micro-leakage of primary teeth restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Saudi dental journal · 2025Review
- Article
- Influence of photodynamic and sonodynamic disinfection on the bond strength of caries-affected dentin bonded to three different tooth-colored restorative materials: A comparative study.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- An In Vitro Assessment of the Shear Bond Strength of Alkasite Restorative Material in Primary Molars Compared with Glass Ionomer and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Restorations.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Effect of the Different Dietary Supplements on the Average Surface Roughness and Color Stability of Direct Restorative Materials Used in Pediatric Dentistry.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methods: 22 specimens prepared with Cention and RMGIC were embedded in primary teeth mounted in acrylic for analysing shear bond strength. Shear bond strength was analysed using a universal testing machine. The modes of failure in samples were observed under a stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope. 22 customised samples of Cention N and RMGIC were prepared and categorised as group A and group B, respectively. The flexural and compressive strengths of these samples were evaluated using a universal testing machine. Results: The shear bond strength of RMGIC was higher than that of Cention N, whereas the compressive and flexural strengths of Cention N were significantly higher than those of RMGIC. The modes of failure were predominantly adhesive followed by mixed failures. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that Cention N demonstrated superior mechanical properties compared with RMGIC and can therefore be recommended for restorations in primary posterior teeth. Cention N being a smart, esthetic, self-cured, or dual-cured material with better mechanical properties offers a wide range of applicability in primary teeth.
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.