ArticleEuropean journal of oral sciences2026
Surface wear and roughness of experimental composites containing calcium orthophosphate particles following toothbrush abrasion.
Article in European journal of oral sciences, 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
Abstract
This study evaluated experimental composites containing dicalcium phosphate dihydrate (DCPD) particles for toothbrush wear and roughness. Composites containing bisphenol-A glycidyl dimethacrylate/triethylene glycol dimethacrylate with 50 vol% inorganic fraction consisting of barium glass and DCPD (35:15 and 15:35 vol%) or barium glass only were tested alongside a commercial composite (Beautifil II, Shofu) and a glass-ionomer cement (GIC, Fuji Gold Label 9, GC). Surface loss and roughness were quantified after 50,000 and 100,000 cycles using optical profilometry. The specimens were observed under scanning electron microscopy. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance/Tukey test. After 50,000 cycles, surface loss was higher for the 35% DCPD composite compared to the experimental control and the GIC. After 100,000 cycles, composites with DCPD presented surface loss not different than the commercial composite but higher than seen for the experimental control and the GIC. Roughness for the composite with 35% DCPD was not different than that of the GIC at baseline, which was higher than seen for the other materials. After 100,000 cycles, roughness for the materials containing DCPD and the GIC were not statistically different. In conclusion, the results suggest that DCPD-containing composites would be better suited for restoration of deciduous teeth and low load-bearing restorations in permanent teeth.
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.