ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research
Comparative evaluation of fluoride release from different modifications of glass ionomer dental restorative material in primary teeth at different time intervals: An ex vivo study.
Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From polyetheretherketone to 3D‑printed composites: hydrothermal stability and cement‑dependent resin bonding of high‑performance polymers to pediatric restorations.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Development of a fast-crosslinking hydrogel system doped with magnetic mesoporous nanoparticles for sustained fluoride ion release and caries prevention.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This ex vivo study aims to evaluate and compare the fluoride-releasing capabilities of different modifications of Glass ionomer cement, namely Giomer, Zirconomer, and Pediatric GIC (type IX) with Resin-modified Glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) in the primary dentition at first, fourteenth, and twenty-eighth days. Materials and methods: Fifty-six extracted human primary molars were allocated into four groups: Group 1, Resin-modified GIC; Group 2, Giomer; Group 3, Zirconomer; and Group 4, Pediatric GIC (type IX). The tooth samples (n = 14) were restored as per the manufacturer's instructions after making class II cavities in primary molars. Extracted tooth specimens were placed in deionized water, and the fluoride ions released were measured for 28 days. The tooth samples were evaluated for cumulative fluoride levels at the end of 24 h, 14th day, and 28th day under normal atmospheric conditions, using a fluoride ion-selective electrode (Orion STAR-A214 Ion analyzer). The data obtained was subjected to statistical analysis, and the results are discussed herein. Results: Fluoride ions releasing capability was exhibited by primary teeth restored with all the above-mentioned materials. The primary teeth restored with Zirconomer exhibited significantly higher fluoride-releasing capability among the above-compared materials, and the primary teeth restored with Giomer exhibited the least fluoride ions release on 24 h, 14th day, and 28th day, and the difference of fluoride ions releasing ability between the four groups was statistically significant at each time interval (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The primary teeth restored with Zirconomer exhibited superior fluoride-releasing ability compared to other restorative materials. Therefore, Zirconomer can be a promising restorative material for primary teeth due to its enhanced anti-caries effect.
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.