Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40655898›Full record

ArticleDental research journal2025

Azadeh Khazaei Zadeh, Sahebeh Haghi, Mona Drikvand

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dental research journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Azadeh Khazaei ZadehDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Sahebeh HaghiDepartment of Operative Dentistry, Dental School, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mona DrikvandDepartment of Operative Dentistry, Students Research Committee, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study compared the color stability of resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) and Cention N bioactive restorative material following exposure to different coloring solutions. Materials and Methods: In this Results: On day 1, the highest and lowest ΔE values were noted in Cention N specimens immersed in Nescafe and Cention N specimens immersed in cola, respectively. On days 7 and 28, the highest and lowest ΔE values were found in RMGI specimens immersed in Nescafe and Cention N specimens immersed in cola, respectively. The effects of the type of material and type of coloring solution and their interaction effect on ΔE of specimens at different time points were statistically significant ( Conclusion: Within the limitations of this

Indexed as

BioactiveCention Nglass ionomerrestorative material

Identifiers

PMID40655898
PMCPMC12251996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.