ArticleBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Flexural Strength of Different Restorative Materials Used for Direct Restoration in Pediatric Dentistry: An In Vitro Study.
Article in Biomimetics (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.
- Fluoride Modified Graded Restoratives Based on Induced Silica Mineralization.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreservation of tooth structure is a key principle in pediatric dentistry, where restorative materials must balance mechanical strength with the preservation of pulp vitality and minimally invasive techniques. The aim of this in vitro study, as it relates to pediatric dentistry, was to investigate the flexural strength of common composite resins, glass ionomer cements, and resin-modified glass ionomer cement within standardized and homogeneous laboratory conditions.
methodsThis study evaluated the flexural strength of seven restorative materials: four composites (Filtek™ Z250, Filtek™ Supreme XT, Gradia, Premise), two GICs (Ketac™ Molar Easymix, GC Fuji IX GP), and one RMGIC (Vitremer). Standardized specimens were prepared and tested using a three-point bending protocol with a universal testing machine (Zwick-Roell Z005). A total of 49 specimens were fabricated and analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed with a one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's post hoc test.
resultsThe flexural strength value of composite resins was significantly greater than that of the glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer cements (
conclusionsComposite resins remain the most durable option for pediatric restorations in stress-bearing areas, whereas RMGICs provide a compromise between mechanical performance and biological advantages such as fluoride release and biocompatibility. Conventional GICs, despite their lower flexural strength, retain clinical relevance in low-load sites and for patients at a high risk of caries. Material selection in pediatric dentistry should therefore be tailored to the child's age, tooth location, and functional demands to ensure long-lasting, minimally invasive restorations. This study involved only mechanical properties alone, and biological aspects, such as fluoride release and biocompatibility, were not considered. Material selection in pediatric dentistry should therefore take into account mechanical requirements, restorative location, and clinical environment.
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.