Effect of smear layer characteristics on dentin bonding durability of HEMA-free and HEMA-containing one-step self-etch adhesives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of smear layer characteristics on the dentin bonding durability of HEMA-free and HEMA-containing one-step self-etch adhesives. Xeno V (XV; HEMA-free), G BOND PLUS (GB; HEMA-free) and Clearfil S(3 )Bond (S(3); HEMA-containing), were applied to dentin surfaces prepared with either #180- or #600-grit SiC paper according to manufacturers' instructions. Bond strengths to dentin were determined using µTBS test after 24-hour, 6-month, and 1-year water storage. In addition, nanoleakage evaluation was performed using an SEM. The smear layer characteristics affected water-tree nanoleakage formation in the adhesive layers of XV and GB, which contributed to a reduction in µTBS after 6-month water storage, while the characteristics did not affect the µTBS of S(3). However, regardless of the smear layer characteristics, 1-year water storage significantly reduced the µTBS of all the adhesives and was associated with an increase in failures at the adhesive-composite interface.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".