ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Truly Universal Dental Cements vs. Conventional Ones-Comparison of Mechanical Properties.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article evaluates the mechanical performance of truly universal resin cements, which promise broad substrate compatibility, simplified self-adhesive dual-cure mechanisms, and functional monomers. It addresses the inconsistent classification of market materials labelled as 'universal' and the lack of clear guidelines. Flexural strength (FS), diametral tensile strength (DTS), and Vickers hardness (HV) of ten resin cements were evaluated: five classified as truly universal (RelyX Universal, Calibra Universal+, Nexus Universal, Panavia SA, SoloCem) and five conventional (Panavia V5, RelyX U200, Cem SE DC, G-Cem One, Maxcem Elite). Significant variations occurred across the tested materials. RelyX Universal exhibited the highest HV (68), while Panavia V5 the lowest (20). FS ranged from 73.0 MPa (Panavia SA) to 114.4 MPa (G-Cem One). Elastic modulus values were lowest for RelyX Universal (3638 MPa) and Panavia SA Cement Universal (3812 MPa), and highest for Cem SE DC (8092 MPa). DTS values were comparable across the groups (35.4-50.2 MPa). No clear differences were observed between cements classified as truly universal and conventional materials in terms of FS, DTS, or HV. However, significant variations were found among individual materials (
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.