Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40291796›Full record

ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research

Comparison of proximal contact tightness and contour of bioclear biofit HD versus Composi-tight 3DXR matrix systems in Class-II composite restoration: A randomized clinical study.

Shreya Volety, Ajay Singh Rao, Karkala Venkappa Kishan, Nimisha C Shah, Dikshit Solanki, Geetanjali Jain

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Shreya VoletyDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, K.M Shah Dental College, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Piparia, Gujarat, Vadodara, India.
Ajay Singh RaoDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, K.M Shah Dental College, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Piparia, Gujarat, Vadodara, India.
Karkala Venkappa KishanDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Srinivas Dental College and Hospital, Mukka, Suratkal, Karnataka, Mangaluru, India.
Nimisha C ShahDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, K.M Shah Dental College, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Piparia, Gujarat, Vadodara, India.
Dikshit SolankiDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, K.M Shah Dental College, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Piparia, Gujarat, Vadodara, India.
Geetanjali JainDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, K.M Shah Dental College, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Piparia, Gujarat, Vadodara, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To assess proximal contact tightness and contour of two different sectional matrix systems in class-II direct composite restoration using newly designed assessment criteria. Materials and methods: In a double-blinded randomized clinical trial, 62 class-II direct composite restorations were performed in 62 patients using Results: The mean ± sd score for clinical and radiographical evaluation of proximal contact tightness of the Conclusion: The study found that the Bioclear Biofit HD matrix system demonstrated better proximal contact and contour than the

Indexed as

Bioclear matrix systemClass-II restorationDirect composite restorationGarrison's matrix systemProximal contact tightnessProximal contour

Identifiers

PMID40291796
PMCPMC12023890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.