ArticleBrazilian oral research2024
Impact of storage conditions on the fracture reliability and physical properties of a dental resin-based composite.
Article in Brazilian oral research, 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.
- Effect of light-curing modes on degree of conversion and color stability of flowable bulk-fill composites: an in vitro experimental study.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the impact of 'storage condition' and 'period of storage' on selected physico-mechanical properties and fracture reliability of a resin-based composite (RBC). Specimens, prepared from a nanofilled RBC (Filtek Z350 XT; 3M ESPE), underwent tests for degree of conversion (DC), flexural strength (σ), flexural modulus (E), and hardness. The specimens were initially grouped into dry storage at 37°C or wet storage in distilled water at 37°C. Subsequently, they were further divided into four subgroups based on the period of storage: 6, 24, 72, or 168 hours. Specimens tested immediately after preparation served as control. Data analysis employed two-way ANOVA and Weibull analysis (α = 5%). Compared to the control, an increase in DC was observed only after 72 hours of dry storage; σ showed higher values after both dry and wet storage, regardless of the storage period (except for the group wet-stored for 168 hours); E increased with dry storage for at least 24 hours or wet storage for 72 hours; and hardness increased after dry storage for at least 24 hours or wet storage for up to 72 hours. The Weibull modulus remained unchanged under any of the distinct storage conditions. Dry storage resulted in greater characteristic strength than the control, whereas wet storage contributed to higher strength values only at shorter periods (up to 24 hours). Overall, the inherent properties of RBCs with a similar composition to that tested in this study may change with varying storage conditions and periods.
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.