ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Evaluation of Oral Mucosa Elastomers for a 3D Oral Simulation Model.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: In order to conduct in vitro studies regarding muco-supported dentures, it is necessary to have a simulation model that simulates the oral mucosa, as it is the main influencing factor for their retention and stabilisation. The aim of this study is to perform tensile and wettability tests in three different elastomers to identify the best material for simulating the oral mucosa. (2) Methods: A tensile test was performed according to ISO 527-1 and a compressive test was performed according to ISO 604:2002, at a constant speed of 10 mm/min. The E-modulus was calculated. A wettability test was performed according to ISO 19403-2. Shore A hardness was measured according to ISO 868:2003. All values were compared with the oral mucosa data. (3) Results: Tensile E-modulus calculation revealed no significant difference between Molloplast
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.