ArticleBMC oral health2025
To polish or not to polish? An evaluation of the accuracy in measuring depth of cure calculated by microhardness ratio.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Depth of Cure of a Simplified Bulk-Fill Universal Composite and a Conventional Resin-Based Composite.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Bletilla striata polysaccharide modified glass ionomer cement: enhanced mechanical and biological properties.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Effect of different light-curing modes and curing times on degree of conversion and microhardness of three different bulk-fill composites: an in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to evaluate the influence of surface polishing on the reliability of microhardness ratio-based assessment of depth of cure in resin-based composites. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 60 composite discs (n = 10 per group) were prepared using six different resin-based composite materials. The tested materials included two conventional sculptable composites (Tetric Prime and Neo Spectra ST HV), one conventional flowable composite (Tetric EvoFlow), one bulk-fill sculptable composite (Tetric PowerFill), and two bulk-fill flowable composites (Tetric PowerFlow and SDR Plus), all prepared according to the respective manufacturers' instructions. Prior to microhardness measurements, the bottom-to-top surface microhardness ratios were assessed using three distinct approaches: 1)unpolished bottom/unpolished top, 2) unpolished bottom/polished top, 3) polished bottom/polished top. Vickers Microhardness Numbers (VHN) were determined under a load of approximately 50 g applied for 15 s. The threshold value for acceptable depth of cure was set at 80%.
resultsStatistical analysis revealed significant differences in the depth of cure measurements of resin-based materials when evaluated using the unpolished bottom/polished top, polished bottom/top, and unpolished bottom/top approaches (p < 0.001). Among these, the lowest degree of conversion was consistently observed in the configuration where the bottom surface remained unpolished while the top surface was polished. Notably, SDR was the only material that surpassed the 80% threshold across all three evaluation methods.
conclusionThe unpolished bottom/polished top configuration resulted in the lowest conversion rates, primarily due to the increase in microhardness values caused by polishing the top surface. Whether or not surface finishing is applied has a substantial impact on the mechanical performance, and should therefore be thoughtfully considered when interpreting the effectiveness of polymerization.
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.