ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2024
Factors Influencing Dentists' Choice of Restorative Materials for Single-Tooth Crowns: A Survey Among Saudi Practitioners.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Dentists' Knowledge and Clinical Preferences Regarding Evidence-Based Restorative Material Selection in Türkiye: Implications for Clinical Practice and Healthcare Policy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of clinical outcomes: Minimally invasive versus conventional restorative techniques.Bioinformation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Material selection is crucial in restorative dentistry, influenced by aesthetics, material properties, and tooth location. This understanding is key for advancing dental practices and patient outcomes. The present study aimed to assess dentists' preferences for restorative materials in single-tooth crowns (SC) and how abutment tooth location and preparation margins influence these choices. MATERIAL AND METHODS A web-based pre-validated questionnaire survey was conducted among 811 actively practicing dentists in Saudi Arabia. RESULTS In posterior teeth, we found that ceramic was the most preferred material for SC regardless of the abutment tooth location and location of margins, followed by porcelain fused to metal (PFMs). In anterior teeth, ceramics were preferred, followed by CAD/CAM-based resin SC. Among the choice of ceramics in teeth for both supra-gingival margins, monolith zirconia was the most-preferred material for SC fabrication in posterior teeth, followed by zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic. Similarly, for sub-gingival margins, monolith zirconia crowns were the most popular option in posterior teeth among the respondents, with the highest in the mandibular molar region. In the anterior region, layered zirconia was the least preferred, and lithium disilicate ceramics was the most-favored option. A statistically significant difference existed between supra- and subgingival preparation for teeth 11 (P=0.01), 16 (P=0.03), and 34 (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS Ceramic was the material of choice among Saudi dentists for replacement of SC, irrespective of the location and preparation margin. Monolith zirconia was usually selected for posterior teeth and lithium disilicate ceramics was the top choice in anterior 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.