ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Polymerization shrinkage and stress of highly filled flowable resin composites used to perform definitive restorations.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare polymerization shrinkage and shrinkage stress of highly filled flowable resin composites with conventional low filled and bulk-fill flowables. MATERIALS AND
methodsFifteen flowable resin composites with A2-shade were tested. For each material, shrinkage depth (µm) was measured using a topography-based cavity method (n = 10), and peak polymerization shrinkage stress (MPa) using a bonded-disc test (n = 5) under a standardized light-curing protocol. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA, Tukey's post-hoc tests, and Pearson's correlations.
resultsShrinkage depth ranged from 84.08 ± 14.66 μm to 169.81 ± 6.93 μm, whereas stress ranged from 2.84 ± 0.28 MPa to 6.34 ± 0.56 MPa. Shrinkage and stress were negatively correlated (r = - 0.749, p = 0.0013). "Bulk-fill" status showed no association with shrinkage stress (r = - 0.136, p = 0.628) or shrinkage depth (r = 0.199, p = 0.476).
conclusionsHighly filled flowables tended to reduce shrinkage but often developed higher stress, whereas some low filled bulk-fills reduced stress despite higher shrinkage. Shrinkage and stress should be considered independently, as material category labels and viscosity classes are not reliable predictors of material behavior. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Polymerization shrinkage and peak shrinkage stress varied markedly among both low filled and highly-filled flowable composites, and the 'bulk-fill' designation was not a reliable predictor of either outcome. Clinicians should therefore select materials according to their specific shrinkage and stress profiles in relation to cavity geometry, rather than relying solely on category labels, especially when maintaining interfacial integrity is critical. CLINICAL
trial registrationNot applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42479231What 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.