ArticleIranian endodontic journal2024
Article in Iranian endodontic journal, 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.
- Are flowable composite resins containing bioactive particles truly biocompatible?Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Histopathological evaluation of bone tissue response to endodontic sealers and gutta-percha using an intraosseous implantation model in Wistar rats.Journal of conservative dentistry and 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Calcium silicate-based sealers are an alternative to be used into root canal, mainly to their biological properties. However, some biological parameters need to be determined in an Materials and Methods: Polyethylene tubes were filled with freshly mixed sealers and implanted in connective subcutaneous tissue of 25 rats (5/euthanasia day) ( Results: The profile of inflammation induced by AH-Plus (Median=2, Range=2-3) was significantly greater than that by Endosequence BC Sealer (Median=1, Range=1-1) during the 15-day experimentation period ( Conclusions: It may be concluded that calcium silicate-based sealer (EndoSequence BC Sealer) and an epoxy resin-based sealer (AH-Plus) presented suitable biocompatibility.
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.