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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Influence of solvents on the bond strength of resin sealer to intraradicular dentin after retreatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Oral Research, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017.vol31.0011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marcelo Palhais, Manoel Damião Sousa-Neto, Fuad Jacob Abi Rached-Junior, Mariana Carvalho de Andrade Amaral, Edson Alfredo, Carlos Eduardo Saraiva Miranda, Yara Teresinha Corrêa Silva-Sousa |
| Abstract |
This study evaluated the removal of filling material with ProTaper Universal Rotary Retreatment system (PTR) combined with solvents and the influence of solvents on the bond strength (PBS) of sealer to intraradicular dentin after canal reobturation. Roots were endodontically treated and distributed to five groups (n = 12). The control group was not retreated. In the four experimental groups, canals were retreated with PTR alone or in combination with xylol, orange oil, and eucalyptol. After filling material removal, two specimens of each group were analysed by SEM and µCT to verify the presence of filling remnants on root canal walls. The other roots were reobturated and sectioned in 1-mm-thick dentin slices that were subjected to the push-out test. Data were analysed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). SEM and µCT analysis revealed that all retreatment techniques left filling remnants on canal walls. The control group (3.47 ± 1.21) presented significantly higher (p < 0.05) PBS than the experimental groups. The groups retreated with PTR alone (2.59 ± 0.99) or combined with xylol (2.54 ± 0.77) and orange oil (2.32 ± 0.93) presented similar bond strength (p > 0.05), and differed significantly from the group with eucalyptol (1.89 ± 0.63). The solvents reduced the PBS of the sealer to dentin and no retreatment technique promoted complete removal of filling material. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 16 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 43% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 18 | 45% |
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 08 February 2017.
All research outputs
#19,947,956
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Oral Research
#272
of 509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#305,309
of 422,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Oral Research
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 422,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 5 of them.