ArticleBioinformation2024
Comparative evaluation of fluoride release profiles in new glass ionomer cements and conventional type II GIC: Implications for cariostatic efficacy.
Article in Bioinformation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Bioactivity of Glass Carbomer Versus Conventional GICs in Sound Enamel and Dentine: A 12-Month SEM-EDS Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Recent progress in antimicrobial strategies of controlled-release nanomaterials for secondary caries.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The fluoride release characteristics of two new Glass Ionomer Cements (GICs), Equia Forte HT and Micron Bioactive, with a conventional Type II restorative GIC is of interest. Fluoride release, a crucial cariostatic property, was evaluated using 18 disc specimens prepared in disposable silicone molds and stored in deionized water for 15 days. Measurements taken on days 1, 3, 7 and 14 with a fluoride ion-specific electrode showed that Equia Forte HT exhibited the highest fluoride release, followed by Micron Bioactive and Type II GIC. Statistical analysis, including ANOVA, confirmed significant differences among the groups, highlighting the superior performance of Equia Forte HT. These findings emphasize the importance of selecting GICs with optimal fluoride release for effective dental restorations and call for further research into their long-term clinical performance.
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.