ArticleBioinformation2026
Assessment of fracture resistance in endodontically treated premolars restored using various bulk-fill composites.
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.
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
Endodontically treated premolars are structurally compromised and highly susceptible to fracture, necessitating restorative materials that can effectively reinforce tooth strength. Therefore, it is of interest to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with three bulk-fill composites and a conventional incremental composite. Eighty premolars were endodontically treated, prepared with standardized MOD cavities and allocated into four groups (n=20): Filtek One Bulk Fill, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, SonicFill 3 and Filtek Z250. Fracture resistance was tested using a universal testing machine and analyzed with one-way ANOVA and chi-square tests. SonicFill 3 demonstrated the highest fracture resistance, followed by other bulk-fill composites, while the conventional composite showed the lowest values, indicating superior reinforcing potential of bulk-fill 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.