Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39027212›Full record

ArticleJournal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry2024

Comparative assessment of the physical structure of antler and bovine bone substitutes: An in vitro study.

Mohammad Hossein Mahboubian, Mahdi Kadkhodazadeh, Reza Amid, Anahita Moscowchi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Mohammad Hossein MahboubianDental Research Center, Research Institute for Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4722-9207
Mahdi KadkhodazadehDental Research Center, Research Institute for Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6131-2791
Reza AmidDental Research Center, Research Institute for Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8053-3928
Anahita MoscowchiDental Research Center, Research Institute for Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1327-5014

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The use of bone graft materials has significantly increased. Given the inherent variations in structure and functionality between different grafting materials, this evaluated and compared the physical attributes of antler and bovine femur bone substitutes. Methods: In the present in vitro investigation, the surface morphological architecture of the two bone substitutes with different origins was assessed through scanning electron microscopy. Furthermore, the Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) technique was employed to measure the porosity, specific surface area (SSA), and pore morphology. Results: Scanning electron microscopy observations indicated that the surface of the bovine particles appeared smoother, while the antler particles exhibited a rougher surface texture. The BET analysis revealed that both samples exhibited identical pore morphology. The SSA was 15.974 m Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, it seems that the two samples of bone grafting materials have comparable physical structures.

Indexed as

Biocompatible materialsBone substitutesPhysical phenomena

Identifiers

PMID39027212
PMCPMC11252153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.