ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2025
Evaluation of the degree of conversion of flowable bulk fill and dual-cure composite resins for intracanal root reinforcement in teeth with structurally weakened roots: An
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative evaluation of effective curing depth and degree of polymerization of different flowable bulk fill composites: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Comparison of the degree of conversion (DC) of resin composites for reinforcement of structurally weakened roots. Aims: To compare the DC of flowable bulk-fill resin composites (BFRCs) and dual-cure resin composite (DCRC) at different depths for root reinforcement material using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy analysis. Materials and Methods: The study included a total of 24 samples from four different resin composite materials, namely Tetric N Flow BFRC (Group 1), Filtek flowable bulk fill composite resin (Group 2), smart dentin replacement (SDR) (Group 3), and ParaCore DCRC (Group 4). These materials were placed into Teflon molds and light-cured. The samples were sectioned into three segments and pulverized. The powdered samples were then mixed with potassium bromide powder in a ratio of 1:100 and subjected to Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy analysis. Statistical Analysis: The data were statistically analyzed using SPSS software using parametric tests. Results: ParaCore dual-cure composite showed the highest DC among all the materials tested, followed by SDR, Filtek bulk fill flowable resin composite, and Tetric bulk fill flowable resin composite. The results of one-way ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference, Conclusion: When the DC is inadequate, the physical, mechanical, and biological properties of the resin composite are compromised. Therefore, dual-cure resins could be better suited to be used for root canal reinforcement.
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.