ReviewRestorative dentistry & endodontics2024
Comparative evaluation of the biological response of conventional and resin modified glass ionomer cement on human cells: a systematic review.
Review in Restorative dentistry & endodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Potential of Nano-Gum Arabic on the Physical, Mechanical, Adhesive, Optical, and Biological Performance of Glass Ionomer Cement: A Comprehensive In Vitro Study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Cytotoxicity of hexagonal boron nitride incorporated conventional and resin modified glass ionomer cements: in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Surface Roughness and Color Stability of Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement Reinforced With a Nanofiller Synthesized by the Coprecipitation Method.International journal of biomaterials · 2026Article
- Advanced Platelet-Rich Fibrin Plus Sealed Exclusively with Glass Ionomer Cement: Setting a New Standard for Healing, Aesthetics and Predictive Modelling in Regenerative Endodontics.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The conventional glass ionomers - A forgotten paradigm.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2024Article
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
This review aimed to evaluate and compare the biological response (biocompatibility and cytotoxicity) of resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) in contrast to conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) on human cells. Articles reporting parallel and split-mouth clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, prospective studies, and Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42023426021.
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.