An

Mahboob Rahaman S K, Pranjali Dutt, Kanchan Sharma, Shreya Gill, Jay Gohil, Vaishali Ulhas Bhalerao, Pratik Surana

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mahboob Rahaman S KDepartment of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, North Bengal Dental College & Hospital, Darjeeling, West Bengal, India.

Pranjali DuttDepartment of Dentistry, Mahamaya Rajkiya Allopathic Medical College, Ambedkarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Kanchan SharmaDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Awadh Dental College and Hospital, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, India.

Shreya GillDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Winchester Dental Care, Virginia, USA.

Jay GohilDepartment of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, K.M Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth deemed to be University, Waghodia, Vadodara, Gujarat, India.

Vaishali Ulhas BhaleraoDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rural Dental College, Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences (DU), Loni Bk. Tal-Rahata, Ahmednagar, India.

Pratik SuranaDepartment of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Maitri College of Dentistry and Research Centre, Durg, Chhattisgarh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Failure of restorative materials under masticatory stress remains a persistent problem in restorative dentistry, particularly in load- bearing areas. Flexural strength is an important mechanical property that influences the fracture resistance and durability of restorative materials. Therefore, it is of interest to evaluate the flexural strength of conventional glass ionomer cement, Type IX glass ionomer cement, and ceramic-reinforced glass ionomer cement (Amalgomer CR). Standardized specimens tested with a universal testing machine showed a significant difference among groups (p < 0.001), with ceramic-reinforced GIC exhibiting the highest flexural strength.

Indexed as

Amalgomer CRflexural strengthGlass ionomer cement

Identifiers

PMID42145355

DOI10.6026/973206300221901

PMCPMC13177090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.