MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1580451927

Comparative evaluation of tensile bond strength of composite resin to etched and unetched glass ionomer cement-An in vitro study

2012· article· en· W1580451927 on OpenAlexaff
Aditya Mitra, Rana K Verghese, Swati Mitra, Ashistaru Saha, Anil Agarwal

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of dental clinics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicEndodontics and Root Canal Treatments
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlass ionomer cementBond strengthUltimate tensile strengthCementComposite materialPhosphoric acidComposite numberMaterials scienceEtching (microfabrication)AdhesiveDentistryMedicineMetallurgy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Acid etching of Glass Ionomer liner to increase bond strength between Glass Ionomer cement and composite resin.  Aims & Objectives: To compare the tensile bond strength of Glass Ionomer cement to composite resin with and without etching the cement.  Materials and Method: Ten pairs of metal cylinders (mould) were prepared for this study. Four groups based on hybrid and micro filled type of composite resin in 10 pairs each. In each type, 10 Glass Ionomer specimens were treated with acid etching and 10 were not treated. Results: The results showed no significant differences between any of four groups, showing that application of 37% phosphoric acid did not result in significant bond strength between Glass Ionomer cement and composite resin.  Conclusion: Both the types of composite resin did not show any significant difference in bond strength to Glass Ionomer cement, whether etched or unetched.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of dental clinicsSame topicEndodontics and Root Canal TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207