MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885293740 · doi:10.1111/jopr.12964

Microstructural and Mechanical Characterization of CAD/CAM Materials for Monolithic Dental Restorations

2018· article· en· W2885293740 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Prosthodontics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsCADMaterials scienceCharacterization (materials science)DentistryEngineeringEngineering drawingMedicineNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine and compare the microstructure, flexural strength, flexural modulus, fracture strength, and microhardness of four types of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) materials for monolithic dental restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A lithium disilicate (LD; IPS e.max CAD), a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS; VITA Suprinity), a hybrid high-performance polymer (HPP) composite resin (GC Cerasmart), and a hybrid polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) material (VITA Enamic) were used to manufacture monolithic ceramic posterior crowns (n = 10) that were adhesively cemented on resin-based composite dies and loaded until fracture. In addition, 40 rectangular bars (n = 10) were milled and polished for three-point flexural strength testing. Microhardness (Vickers indentation), as well as quantitative (energy dispersive spectroscopy) and qualitative (scanning electron microscopy) structural analysis were conducted on fracture surfaces. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD post-hoc test (p = 0.05). RESULTS: Mechanical testing results showed that the material type has a significant effect on the fracture strength (p < 0.0001) of the monolithic crowns with ZLS and LD presenting significantly higher fracture strength than the PICN and HPP hybrid materials. LD showed the highest flexural strength (p < 0.0001) followed by ZLS, HPP, and PICN, respectively. The lowest flexural modulus and hardness were presented by HPP whereas ZLS had the highest flexural modulus and hardness. The LD presented the highest modulus of resilience and the PICN the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: All CAD/CAM crown materials exhibited high values of fracture and flexural resistance, making them suitable materials for posterior full-crown restorations. Glass-ceramics suffered more from catastrophic and nonreparable fracture patterns, whereas minimal chipping and type II fracture patterns were more common in hybrid materials. The combination of more flexibility, less stiffness, and increased softness with satisfactory flexural and fracture strength values observed in PICN and HPP makes these two hybrid materials suitable choices for chairside monolithic crown fabrication.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.280 · 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