Amalgam bonding: visualization and clinical implications of adhesive displacement during amalgam condensation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resin adhesive was visualized in this in vitro study of amalgam bonding using methylene blue dye incorporated into the resin or by scanning electron microscopy. Class II amalgam cavities were prepared in extracted teeth previously stored in buffered formalin. The preparations were then restored following manufacturers' instructions, but included methylene blue dissolved in ethanol into the adhesive resin mixture. This procedure had little effect on the setting time of the resin. Following condensation and carving, excess resin was incorporated into the body of the restorations as well as onto all adjacent coronal surfaces with significant occlusal and proximal accumulations. Resin also accumulated in significant amounts on the gingival floor of the proximal box and at line angles and retentive grooves within the preparation. In conclusion, radiological studies demonstrated that artifacts produced by resin accumulation at the gingival floor of the box could be mistaken for an open margin or recurrent caries. Other potential clinical consequences of resin residue on tooth surfaces are discussed, including the problem of interproximal ledges and occlusal discrepancies. The incorporation of a radiopaque material in the resin systems should be a universal requirement.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".