↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of factors associated with the retention of glass fiber posts

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Oral Research, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
291 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A systematic review of factors associated with the retention of glass fiber posts
Published in
Brazilian Oral Research, June 2015
DOI 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2015.vol29.0074
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jovito Adiel Skupien, Rafael Sarkis-Onofre, Maximiliano Sérgio Cenci, Rafael Ratto de Moraes, Tatiana Pereira-Cenci

Abstract

This study aimed to identify factors that can affect the retention of glass fiber posts to intra-radicular dentin based on in vitro studies that compared the bond strength (BS) of GFPs cemented with resin cements. Searches were carried out in PubMed and Scopus until December 2013. Bond strength values and variables as type of tooth, presence of endodontic treatment, pretreatment of the post, type of bonding agent (if present), type of cement and mode of cement application were extracted from the 34 included studies. A linear regression model was used to evaluate the influence of these parameters on BS. The presence of endodontic treatment decreased the BS values in 22.7% considering the pooled data (p = 0.013). For regular cement, cleaning the post increased BS when compared to silane application without cleaning (p = 0.032), considering cleaning as ethanol, air abrasion, or phosphoric acid application. Applying the cement around the post and into root canal decreased the resistance compared to only around the post (p = 0.02) or only into root canal (p = 0.041), on the other hand, no difference was found for self-adhesive resin cement for the same comparisons (p = 0.858 and p = 0.067). Endodontic treatment, method of cement application, and post pretreatment are factors that might significantly affect the retention of glass-fiber posts into root canals mainly when cemented with regular resin cement. Self-adhesive resin cements were found to be less technique-sensitive to luting procedures as compared with regular resin cements.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 291 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Unknown 290 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 56 19%
Student > Bachelor 39 13%
Student > Postgraduate 36 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 14 5%
Other 45 15%
Unknown 86 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 168 58%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 1%
Materials Science 4 1%
Other 12 4%
Unknown 94 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2015.
All research outputs
#16,840,561
of 25,543,275 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Oral Research
#180
of 508 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,648
of 264,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Oral Research
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,543,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 508 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,372 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.