ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2026
Comparative
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 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
Aims and background: Milk is a fundamental source of nourishment for infants until they are weaned. It plays a role in enamel remineralization, inhibits bacterial adhesion, and prevents biofilm formation. Although lactose present in milk is a fermentable sugar, certain conditions can promote caries formation from milk consumption. As milk is widely consumed by children, this study aims to evaluate how different types of milk influence dental health. Methodology: A total of 40 primary incisors were included in the study, which were initially tested for mineral content and pH. These teeth were immersed in vial tubes containing four different types of milk. Later, the teeth were analyzed for mineral content, pH, and microhardness, respectively. Results: Calcium content increased in all groups, with the highest increase in breast milk, and pH dropped significantly in infant formula and soy milk, and a lower hardness values were seen in infant formula and soy milk. Conclusion: Human breast milk (HBM) and bovine milk had a protective effect on enamel, indicated by an increase in calcium content, stable or minimally reduced pH, and higher postimmersion hardness values. In contrast, soy milk and infant formula showed a significant drop in enamel pH and hardness values, with infant formula additionally causing mineral loss. Clinical significance: The type of milk consumed during infancy can affect early enamel integrity. Breast and bovine milk offer better protection against demineralization compared to soy milk and infant formulas. How to cite this article: Jalumuru A, Maganti SR, Naren P,
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.