ArticleCureus2024
A Comparative In Vitro Analysis of Antimicrobial Effectiveness and Compressive Strength of Ginger and Clove-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Comparative Evaluation of Antimicrobial Activity between Clove and Ginger Extracts againstInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Glass ionomer cement (GIC) is widely recognized for its self-adhesive characteristics and biocompatibility, making it commonly used as a restorative material. However, challenges related to limited antibacterial effectiveness and relatively low mechanical properties have hindered its widespread clinical use. Clove and ginger are recognized for their potent antimicrobial activity against numerous pathogenic microorganisms. The present study aims to enhance the clinical applicability of GIC by modifying it with clove and ginger extract. Aim The objective of the study is to assess the antimicrobial effectiveness and compressive strength of GIC modified with ginger and clove extract. Materials and methods Ginger and clove extracts were prepared and incorporated into conventional GIC at three concentrations for each, creating ginger-modified GIC groups (Group A, Group B, and Group C) and clove-modified GIC groups (Group D, Group E, and Group F), with Group G as the control (conventional GIC without modification). The antimicrobial assessment was conducted on disc-shaped GIC specimens (3.0 mm height x 6.0 mm diameter) prepared using molds. Bacterial strains were used to evaluate antimicrobial properties, with minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) assays conducted at intervals of one to four hours for both modified and unmodified groups. Compressive strength specimens were prepared using cylindrical molds (6.0 mm height × 4.0 mm diameter), according to the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) guidelines. The evaluation was conducted using a Zwick universal testing machine (ElectroPuls® E3000, Instron, Bangalore, India), with the highest force at the point of specimen fracture recorded to determine compressive strength. Statistical analysis was conducted utilizing a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) alongside Tukey's post hoc test, with a significance threshold set at p < 0.01. Results The antimicrobial effectiveness of clove and ginger-modified GIC was assessed through a MIC assay, revealing a statistically significant improvement in antimicrobial potency against
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.