MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102638905 · doi:10.1093/ejo/24.6.689

Polymerization with a micro-xenon light of a resin-modified glass ionomer: a shear bond strength study 15 minutes after bonding

2002· article· en· W2102638905 on OpenAlexaff
Vittorio Cacciafesta

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Orthodontics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlass ionomer cementUniversal testing machineMaterials scienceBond strengthCuring (chemistry)Composite materialPolymerizationDentistryUltimate tensile strengthAdhesiveMedicinePolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the initial shear bond strength (15 minutes after bonding) of a resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC, Fuji Ortho LC) cured with two different light-curing units: a conventional visible light (Ortholux XT) and a microxenon light (Aurys). Seventy-five freshly extracted bovine permanent mandibular incisors were randomly assigned to one of five groups; each group consisted of 15 specimens. Group A (Transbond XT) and group B (Fuji Ortho LC) were exposed to the visible light for 20 and 40 seconds, respectively, and used as controls. The remaining three groups (C, D, and E) were bonded with Fuji Ortho LC and cured with Aurys for 10, 5, and 2 seconds, respectively. All samples were tested in a shear mode on an Instron universal testing machine 15 minutes after bonding. The shear bond strength of the control group bonded with Transbond XT was significantly higher (P = 0.000) than those of all the other groups tested. Regarding Fuji Ortho LC, no statistically significant differences were found between the bond strength of the control group cured with Ortholux XT, and those of the groups cured with Aurys for 2, 5, and 10 seconds. The present findings indicate that, compared with visible light-curing, the micro-xenon light enables the clinician to significantly reduce the curing time of RMGICs, without affecting their initial shear bond strengths.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of OrthodonticsSame topicDental materials and restorationsFrench-language works237,207