↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of dentin hypersensitivity treatment with glass ionomer cements: A randomized clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Oral Research, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Evaluation of dentin hypersensitivity treatment with glass ionomer cements: A randomized clinical trial
Published in
Brazilian Oral Research, January 2017
DOI 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017.vol31.0003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marina de Matos Madruga, Adriana Fernandes da Silva, Wellington Luiz de Oliveira da Rosa, Evandro Piva, Rafael Guerra Lund

Abstract

A randomized, double-blind, split-mouth clinical trial was performed compared the desensitizing efficacy of the resin-modified glass ionomer cement (GIC) ClinproTM XT (3M ESPE, Minnesota, USA) and the conventional GIC Vidrion R (SS White, Gloucester, UK) in a 6-month follow-up. Subjects were required to have at least two teeth with dentin hypersensitivity. Teeth were divided at random into 2 groups, one group received Clinpro XT and the other conventional GIC Vidrion R. Treatments were assessed by tactile and air blast tests using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at baseline, after 20 minutes, and at 7, 15, 21, 30, 90 and 180 days post-treatment. Twenty subjects (152 teeth) were included. Both tests (tactile and air blast) showed a significant reduction of dentin hypersensitivity immediately after the application of Vidrion R and Clinpro XT (20 min). VAS scores obtained along the 6-month follow-up were statistically lower when compared to initial rates (p < 0.05). Both GIC were able to reduce dentin hypersensitivity up to 6-month post-treatment period without statistically significant differences among them (p > 0.05). Both cements provided satisfactory results in long-term dental sensitivity reduction.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 44 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Materials Science 2 2%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Computer Science 1 <1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 48 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Oral Research
#296
of 509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#320,146
of 421,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Oral Research
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 509 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 421,652 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.