MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Flexural Strength, Elastic Modulus, and pH Profile of Self‐etch Resin Luting Cements

2007· article· en· W2039546808 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Prosthodontics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMaterials scienceFlexural strengthComposite materialGlass ionomer cementUniversal testing machineYoung's modulusElastic modulusCementFlexural modulusUltimate tensile strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine the flexural strength, modulus of elasticity, and 24-hour pH profile of three self-etching resin luting cements and to obtain comparative data for representative conventional resin and resin-modified glass ionomer luting cements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three self-etching resin luting cements [RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE), Maxcem (Kerr), Embrace Wetbond (Pulpdent)] were tested and compared with two conventional resin cements [RelyX ARC (3M ESPE), Linkmax (GC)] plus two resin-modified glass ionomer luting cements [Fuji Plus (GC), RelyX Luting Plus (3M ESPE)]. Flexural strength and modulus of elasticity were determined using bar-shaped specimens (2 x 2 x 25 mm(3)) at 24 hours, using an Instron universal testing machine. Setting pH was measured using a flat-surface pH electrode at 0, 2, 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours after mixing. Testing was performed under both dual-cured and self-cured conditions for all dual-cure cements. Data analysis included ANOVA and Tukey's test (p < 0.05). RESULTS: The self-etching cements showed similar flexural strength to the conventional resin cements, except for Embrace Wetbond self-cured, which was considerably lower. Modulus of elasticity results were both higher and lower than for conventional resin cements. All photopolymerized conventional and self-etch dual-cure cements showed markedly higher flexural strength and modulus than when solely self-cured. The resin-modified glass ionomer cements were characterized by lower flexural strength and elastic modulus. Self-etching resin cements showed lower initial pH (2.0 to 2.4) than conventional resin cements (4.8 to 5.2) and a wide range of final pH values (3.9 to 7.3) at 24 hours. One self-etching cement (Unicem) revealed a unique pH profile characterized by a more rapid rise in pH to neutrality both when dual-cured (15 minutes) and when auto-cured (1 hour). CONCLUSIONS: The self-etching resin cements evaluated in this study displayed disparate properties and cannot be considered a homogeneous group. Flexural strength properties were most uniform and were similar to those of the conventional resin cements, whereas moduli of elasticity showed greater variation. Setting pH profiles differed, depending on the brand and mode of cure, even within the same category of luting cement. All cements with dual-cure capability, both conventional and self-etch, showed significantly superior properties when photopolymerized.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.279 · 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