ArticleOdontology2026
Effect of polymerization mode and LED light-curing units on the shear bond strength of an alkasite restorative material to dentin.
Article in Odontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This in vitro study evaluated the effects of different polymerization approaches and LED light-curing units on the shear bond strength (SBS) of a bioactive alkasite restorative material to dentin and compared the results with those of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC). Fifty extracted human premolars were randomly assigned to five groups according to the polymerization protocol. The alkasite material was polymerized either by self-curing or with two different LED light-curing units (VALO Cordless and Bluephase), while the RMGIC was light-cured using the same devices. All specimens were subjected to 5,000 thermal cycles between 5 °C and 55 °C before SBS testing using a universal testing machine. Failure modes were evaluated using stereomicroscopy, and representative specimens were examined by scanning electron microscopy. The mean SBS values were 15.77 ± 5.66 MPa, 15.51 ± 3.16 MPa, and 16.11 ± 4.37 MPa for the self-cured, VALO-cured, and Bluephase-cured alkasite groups, respectively, whereas the corresponding values for the RMGIC groups were 8.97 ± 2.80 MPa and 8.20 ± 2.51 MPa. No significant differences were observed among the alkasite groups or between the RMGIC groups (p > 0.05). However, all alkasite groups demonstrated significantly higher SBS values than the RMGIC groups (p ≤ 0.004). The findings of the present study demonstrate that the bioactive alkasite restorative material provides higher dentin bond strength than the RMGIC, regardless of the polymerization mode or LED light-curing unit used. Furthermore, neither self-curing nor light-curing with different LED devices significantly affected its shear bond strength.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42599589What 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.