ArticleJournal of Indian Prosthodontic Society2026
Evaluation of wear resistance in 3D printed temporary restorative material using two different printing technologies" - An in vitro study.
Article in Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to assess and compare the wear resistance of 3D printable crown and bridge interim resin material with two different 3D printers. SETTINGS AND
designIn vitro comparative study. MATERIALS AND
methods60 specimens were divided into 2 groups and designed using nx12 (Unigraphics) software. This Standard Tessellation Language file was used to print the specimens. Specimens fabricated using Phrozen Sonic Mini 3D printer of LCD software were grouped as Group A (n = 30), and specimens fabricated using Asiga Max 3D printer of DLP software were grouped as Group B (n = 30). Surface micro roughness measurements (Ra) were noted with a profilometer prior to and following toothbrush wear simulation. The collected data were tabulated to facilitate statistical analysis. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney U-test was employed for multiple comparisions.
resultsThe Student's t-test was employed to compare the mean surface micro-roughness of Group A and Group B specimens before and after toothbrush wear simulation. The test indicated that there was no significant difference.
conclusionWithin the scope of this study, both groups underwent wear and were statistically insignificant.
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.