1,721,026 research outputs found
Microscopical analysis of dentin exposure after standardized preparation for porcelain laminate veneers
No full text
Dentin Exposure after Tooth Preparation for Laminate Veneers: A Microscopical Analysis to Evaluate the Influence of Operators’ Expertise
Full text linkBackground: To assess the quantity of dentin exposure detected by 3 operators with different clinical expertise for 2 designs of tooth preparation for laminate veneers: window (WI) and butt joint (BJ). Methods: 20 intact maxillary central incisors were collected and then prepared for laminate veneers to a depth of 0.6 mm, with a cervical mini-chamfer finish line of 0.3 mm. Each prepared tooth was analyzed by 3 operators with different expertise: undergraduate student (ST), general practitioner (GP), and prosthodontist (PR), at sight under magnification. Besides descriptive statistics (CI 95%), 2-way ANOVA and Games–Howell tests were used to analyze differences among groups (α = 0.05). Results: The means of percentage and area of detected dentin exposure were WI = 30.48%, 21.57 mm2; BJ = 30.99%, 21.97 mm2; ST/WI = 22.82%, 16.44 mm2; GP/WI = 58.05%, 40.64 mm2; PR/WI = 10.55%, 7.63 mm2; ST/BJ = 28.99%, 20.83 mm2; GP/BJ = 40.56%, 28.32 mm2; PR/BJ = 23.42%, 16.75 mm2. Significant differences were found between ST/WI vs. GP/WI (p = 0.005) and GP/WI vs. PR/WI (p < 0.001). Conclusions: There was no difference in detection of exposed dentin among operators with different expertise for BJ preparation, whereas differences were found between the general practitioner and the other 2 operators in WI. Moreover, the quantity of exposed dentin was not related to different tooth preparation designs
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Effects of the combined action of a desensitizing gel and toothpaste on dentin hypersensitivity due to dental bleaching.
No full textProliferation and adhesion capability of human gingival fibroblasts on zirconia, lithium disilicate and feldspathic veneering ceramic in vitro.
No full text
Proliferation and adhesion capability of human gingival fibroblasts on zirconia, lithium disilicate and feldspathic veneering ceramic in vitro.
No full text- …
