ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluation of color matching and microhardness of two different universal-shade resin composites: an invitro study.
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 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.
- Stain susceptibility of a giomer and a particulate-filled injectable composite with one-step and multi-step polishing techniques, and color recovery after brushing and repolishing.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Article
- Effect of Wetting Agents on Microhardness, Color, and Gloss of a Nanohybrid Composite after Aging.Brazilian dental journal · 2026Article
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
backgroundDentists have started to use universal shade resin composites to simplify shade selection. This in vitro study assessed the color matching of two distinct universal shade resin composites (OMNICHROMA
methodsFor color matching evaluation, forty maxillary sound human premolars were collected. Only A3 shaded teeth were chosen after VITA Easyshade V recorded the color coordinates of the teeth via the CIELab color system before interventions. After that, the teeth were randomly allocated into two groups according to the tested materials, with twenty teeth included in each group (n = 20). The teeth were then prepared with class V cavity preparations, the group (M1) teeth were restored with Omnichroma, and the group (M2) teeth were restored with Oneshade. All teeth were evaluated after 24 h of restoration (T1), after 3 months of immersion in tea solution (T2) and after 6 months of immersion in tea solution (T3). To evaluate color matching, both instrumental and visual color changes were recorded. For microhardness evaluation, forty cylindrical discs were made (20 discs for each composite group M1 and M2). Vickers microhardness measurements were performed via a microhardness testing machine. The samples were measured at baseline (C1), after 2500 thermocycles (C2) and after 5000 thermocycles (C3).
resultsIn accordance with the color matching results, both tested composite materials showed significant color mismatching after immersion in tea solution. In accordance with the surface microhardness evaluation, both tested resin composite materials showed a significant decrease in the Vickers microhardness after thermocycling.
conclusionsFollowing immersion in the staining solution, both evaluated resin composite materials displayed unsatisfactory color matching values in class V restorations. Accelerated aging by thermocycling had an obvious negative effect on the microhardness of the universal shade resin materials.
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.