MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403155405 · doi:10.1016/j.jds.2024.09.023

The effect of stannous fluoride desensitizing toothpaste on immediate dentin sealing ability of universal adhesive in vitro

2024· article· en· W4403155405 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kanittha Kijsamanmith, Panita Sasananda, Punnavit Ngamlertnapaporn, Suphalak Trairattanathada, Atis Kijsiripanth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dental Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Erosion and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMahidol UniversityFaculty of Dentistry, McGill University
KeywordsToothpasteAdhesiveDentinFluorideIn vitroChemistryDentistryMedicineBiochemistryInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stannous fluoride pretreatment of dentin may compromise the bond formation of the dentinal adhesive system. This study aimed to determine the effect of stannous fluoride (SnF 2 ) desensitizing toothpaste on immediate dentin sealing ability (IDS) of universal adhesive in human intact dentin using dentin permeability test and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS). Sixty sound dentin specimens were prepared from 60 extracted intact third molars, then treated with 17 % EDTA for 60 s to simulate hypersensitive dentin, and randomly divided into 2 series. Series 1 (dentin permeability test; n = 40) had 4 different treatment groups: (1) universal adhesive (self-etch mode), (2) universal adhesive (total-etch mode), (3) SnF 2 pretreatment + universal adhesive (self-etch), (4) SnF 2 pretreatment + universal adhesive (total-etch). The IDS of each group was the percentage decrease of hydraulic conductance of dentin after bonding. Series 2 (n = 20) was SEM-EDS analysis of different treated dentin before bonding. The data were analyzed using 2-way ANOVA and Tukey test. In groups of no SnF 2 pretreatment, the IDS of universal adhesive were 79.53 ± 20.71 and 77.34 ± 18.14 % for self-etch and total-etch mode, respectively. In groups of SnF 2 pretreatment, the corresponding values were 71.54 ± 15.56 and 69.56 ± 9.92 %, respectively. Although SnF 2 pretreated-dentin had the remarkable signals of silicon and tin, there were no significant reductions in the IDS of universal adhesive ( P < 0.05). SnF 2 desensitizing toothpaste has no adverse effect on the immediate dentin sealing ability of universal adhesive.

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)0.002
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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dental SciencesSame topicDental Erosion and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207