ArticleScientific reports2026
Mechanical behavior of tooth-class II restoration complex with various restorative materials using linear and non-linear finite element analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the mechanical behavior of the tooth-class II restoration complex restored with composite resin, ceramic, amalgam, and gold using three-dimensional linear and non-linear finite element analyses (FEA). Previous FEA studies generally assumed linear mechanical properties and bonded interfaces between tooth and restorative materials, which differ from clinical reality, particularly for non-bonded restorations such as amalgam and gold. Therefore, in this study, non-linear mechanical properties and non-bonded contact conditions were adopted for different restorative materials. The results showed that the highest enamel and dentin stresses occurred in amalgam restorations, while the lowest were found in ceramic restorations. Amalgam and gold produced higher stress in enamel and dentin compared with composite resin and ceramic. The higher stress observed in amalgam and gold was mainly associated with the non-bonded (frictional) contact condition, because the stresses in these restorations remained below their reported yield strengths under the applied loading conditions. This study provides mechanical insights into the behavior of the tooth-class II restoration complex and offers a possible mechanical interpretation of previously reported clinical observations. These findings should be interpreted within the limitations of the finite element model and do not directly represent clinical outcomes.
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.