ArticleScientific reports2024
Influence of various cleaning solutions on the geometry, roughness, gloss, hardness, and flexural strength of 3D-printed zirconia.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Wearable Sensors Fabricated by 3D-Printed Composite Hydrogel with 2D Fillers.Small methods · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the impact of various cleaning solutions on the geometry, roughness, gloss, hardness, and flexural strength of 3D-printed zirconia. Cleaning solutions, including isopropyl alcohol (IPA, 99.9%), ethyl alcohol (EtOH, 99.9%), and tripropylene glycol monomethyl ether (TPM, ≥ 97.5%), were diluted to a concentration of 70% and categorized into six groups: IPA99, EtOH99, TPM97, IPA70, EtOH70, and TPM70. Zirconia discs, printed via digital light processing, were sintered after cleaning. The geometry, roughness, gloss, hardness, and flexural strength were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc test (p < 0.05). The thickness of TPM70 was the highest. The diameter of TPM70 was significantly larger than that of EtOH99 and IPA70 (p < 0.05). The weight of the TPM groups was significantly higher than that of IPA70 (p < 0.05). The roughness Ra of TPM70 was significantly greater than that of IPA99, EtOH99, and EtOH70 (p < 0.05). The differences in surface gloss, hardness, and flexural strength among the different groups were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Different cleaning solutions did not affect the surface gloss, hardness, and flexural strength of 3D-printed zirconia. High and low concentrations of the same cleaning solution did not affect the surface gloss, hardness, and flexural strength. IPA70, TPM97, and EtOH can be considered viable post-printing cleaning alternatives to the traditional gold standard, IPA99.
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.