Trial reportScientific reports2024
A comparison between in vitro and randomized in situ models for remineralization of artificial enamel lesions.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of a 45S5 bioactive glass-containing gel on the remineralization of artificial caries-like lesions in primary teeth: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the effects of different remineralizing agents on the microhardness and mineral content of bleached enamel along different storage times.BMC oral health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The randomized study aimed to evaluate the comparability of in situ (iS) and in vitro (iV) study protocols regarding remineralization of artificial enamel lesions. Two toothpastes (group A: 1450 ppm sodium fluoride, group B: placebo 0 ppm F-), were investigated. IV, a pH-cycling model with toothpaste slurry treatment was applied for 10d. IS, remineralization was performed in 9 participants wearing splints with embedded enamel samples for 10 and 21d, randomly allocated to groups A and B. Samples were scanned by X-ray micro-computed tomography (μCT) and grayscale value line profiles corresponding to mineral density (rel.ΔZ) were analyzed. Statistical analyses were performed using MedCalc Statistical Software, v22.021. T-Test for dependent and independent data and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used for further analyses (α = 0.05). Rel.ΔZ of fluoride treated samples (A) were iV = 40.2%, iS 10d = 11.5% and iS 21d = 46.1% (p > 0.05). Rel.ΔZ of placebo treated samples (B) were: iV = - 6.2%, iS 10d = 25.2% and iS 21d = 11.0% (p > 0.05). Remineralization potential of both toothpastes was significantly different regarding iV (p < 0.001) and iS after 21d (p = 0.034), while in case of iS 10d no significant difference was detected (p = 0.4). Despite different study protocols the μCT results after remineralization were comparable between iV and iS. The results suggest that selected studies can be carried out in faster, simplified iV studies using pH-cycling instead of iS studies.
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.