ArticleOdontology2026
Surface roughness and shear bond strength of novel polymethylmethacrylate-based materials.
Article in Odontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim was to evaluate the surface roughness (Ra) and shear bond strength (SBS) of novel polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA)-based materials. Thirty rectangular specimens were prepared from three different PMMA-based materials: nanographene-reinforced PMMA, milled PMMA, and self-curing PMMA. All specimens underwent a polishing process and the Ra value was then recorded using a non-contact profilometer. A special plate was then used to bond nanoflowable composite resin to the specimens' surfaces, after which they underwent thermocycling between 5 and 55 °C for 5000 cycles. The SBS was subsequently evaluated at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test (α = 0.05) were used for data analysis. The Ra and SBS values differed significantly (p < 0.001). The self-curing PMMA specimens had the highest mean Ra value (1.15 μm), while the G-CAM specimens had a mean Ra value of 0.55 μm and the milled PMMA specimens had a mean Ra value of 0.53 μm. SBS in the milled PMMA group was measured at 51.25 MPa; SBS in the G-CAM and self-curing PMMA specimens was lower than in the milled PMMA specimens (34.36 and 31.22 MPa, respectively). Although nanographene-reinforced PMMA exhibited an acceptable Ra value, its SBS value was lower than that of milled PMMA.
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.