ArticleInternational journal of dental hygiene2026
Erosion Potential of Commercial Fluoride-Free Mouthwashes on Dental Hard Tissues.
Article in International journal of dental hygiene, 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
purposeMouthwashes often present acidic pH, which raises concerns about their potential contribution to erosive tooth wear. This study evaluated the erosive potential of commercial fluoride-free mouthwashes using a screening method.
methodsA convenience sample of 81 different mouthwashes was evaluated for their erosion potential (International Organization for Standardization, ISO/FDIS 28888:2013). This method measured the pH changes (ΔpH) of 25 mL of calcium phosphate solution (baseline pH 5.05 ± 0.05; mean ± standard deviation) once the test mouthwash was added (0.25 mL). Three citric acid/citrate buffers were used, with the maximum allowable ΔpH based on the strongest buffer. Each mouthwash was tested four times, and mean values, standard deviations, and the correlation/regression between the initial and final pH were calculated.
resultsMouthwashes presented a baseline pH range of 3.00-9.47. The reference solutions resulted in ΔpH of 0.58 ± 0.00, 0.89 ± 0.00, and 1.20 ± 0.01, respectively. None of the mouthwashes showed ΔpH higher than the strongest standard. Several unexpected results were observed: (i) nine mouthwashes with initial pH above 5.00 caused a pH drop when added to the screening solution; (ii) one mouthwash with initial pH 4.27 caused a pH drop to 4.17; and (iii) one with initial pH 4.93 caused a pH increase to 6.18. The correlation and regression values were: r = -0.81/r
conclusionMost mouthwashes showed no erosive potential, but unexpected pH shifts in over 10% highlight the need to refine testing methods for fluoride-free products. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Some fluoride-free mouthwashes may contribute to dental erosion due to low pH. Identifying these products helps clinicians make safer recommendations for daily use.
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.