MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417215815 · doi:10.1002/jper.70024

Comparative efficacy of novel bioactive glass versus sodium fluoride toothpaste for dentin hypersensitivity: A randomized clinical trial

2025· article· en· W4417215815 on OpenAlexaff
Hatice Hastürk, Daniel Boyd, Kathleen MacDonald‐Parsons, Stephanie D. Turner, Joon Seong, Nicola West, Heather Doucette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Periodontology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Erosion and Treatment
Canadian institutionsGreenfield Research (Canada)Dalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsToothpasteDentin hypersensitivityBioactive glassDentifriceDentin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This first-in-human clinical study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a bioglass incorporated in a toothpaste, in reducing dentin hypersensitivity (DH) compared to a sodium fluoride (NaF) toothpaste over a 2-week period. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, parallel-arm, proof-of-concept clinical trial was conducted with 46 participants experiencing self-reported and clinically confirmed DH. Participants were assigned to 1 of 2 groups: (1) Test toothpaste (5 wt% bioglass with 1425 ppm fluoride as NaF), or (2) NaF toothpaste (1425 ppm fluoride). Outcomes included Schiff Airblast Sensitivity Score (primary endpoint), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, and Yeaple Probe tactile sensitivity (secondary endpoints). Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and descriptive statistics, were performed to evaluate intergroup differences. RESULTS: The Test group exhibited a statistically significant reduction in Schiff Airblast Sensitivity Scores at Day 14 compared to the NaF group (ΔMean: -0.8 vs. -0.5, p = 0.0341). Significant improvements were also observed in VAS pain scores in as little as 2 days (ΔMean: -1.03 vs. 0.04, p = 0.0057). Rapid pain relief was noted within 2 days, indicating both immediate and cumulative effects. The difference in tactile scores was not statistically significant between groups although greater change was seen with Test toothpaste (ΔMean 13 vs. 3 g; p = 0.068). No severe adverse events were reported, and safety profiles were comparable across groups. CONCLUSION: The toothpaste containing the bioglass demonstrated superior efficacy in alleviating DH symptoms at both early and later time points through its mechanism of rapid tubule occlusion. This innovative approach aligns with World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for fluoride use and addresses unmet needs in DH management globally. Further research is warranted to explore its long-term applications in preventive and restorative dentistry. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: U.S. National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry (http://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov) ID NCT06166745.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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