ArticleMedicine and pharmacy reports2025
Assessment of hardness and microroughness of injection-molded thermoplastic resins used for flexible removable partial dentures.
Article in Medicine and pharmacy reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aim: This study evaluates and compares three types of thermoplastic resins used for flexible, removable partial dentures, focusing on their microhardness and surface roughness. Methods: Thirty samples with a thickness of 2 mm were obtained from thermoplastic resins and were tested after 24 hours of immersion in distilled water. The samples were obtained from injected resin cartridges of three thermoplastic resins with different degrees of flexibility. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were performed to compare the samples. A Pearson correlation was calculated between the two parameters, surface roughness and Vickers microhardness. Results: After statistical analysis, significant differences were found between the two resins' surface roughness. Regarding Vickers microhardness, one of the resins with the lowest flexibility range exhibited higher microhardness values. Conclusions: Surface roughness values for the three resins were below 0.2 microns. Microhardness test revealed significant differences between Flaxiacryl and Flexifast samples (p<.05).
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.