Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 470

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Adhesive/Dentin Interface: The Weak Link in the Composite Restoration

Open access
Spencer, Paulette, Ye, Qiang, Park, Jonggu, Topp, Elizabeth M., Misra, Anil, Marangos, Orestes, Wang, Yong, Bohaty, Brenda S., Singh, Viraj, Sene, Fabio, Eslick, John, Camarda, Kyle, Katz, J. Lawrence·2010·Annals of Biomedical Engineering
DOI 10.1007/s10439-010-9969-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Results from clinical studies suggest that more than half of the 166 million dental restorations that were placed in the United States in 2005 were replacements for failed restorations. This emphasis on replacement therapy is expected to grow as dentists use composite as opposed to dental amalgam to restore moderate to large posterior lesions. Composite restorations have higher failure rates, more recurrent caries, and increased frequency of replacement as compared to amalgam. Penetration of bacterial enzymes, oral fluids, and bacteria into the crevices between the tooth and composite undermines the restoration and leads to recurrent decay and premature failure. Under in vivo conditions the bond formed at the adhesive/dentin interface can be the first defense against these noxious, damaging substances. The intent of this article is to review structural aspects of the clinical substrate that impact bond formation at the adhesive/dentin interface; to examine physico-chemical factors that affect the integrity and durability of the adhesive/dentin interfacial bond; and to explore how these factors act synergistically with mechanical forces to undermine the composite restoration. The article will examine the various avenues that have been pursued to address these problems and it will explore how alterations in material chemistry could address the detrimental impact of physico-chemical stresses on the bond formed at the adhesive/dentin interface.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10439-010-9969-6

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 71 references

Cited by

See all 470

Metadata

Authors
Spencer, P., Ye, Q., Park, J., Topp, E. M., Misra, A., Marangos, O., Wang, Y., Bohaty, B. S., Singh, V., Sene, F., Eslick, J., Camarda, K., & Katz, J. L.
Venue
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2010-02-27
Volume
38
Issue
6
Pages
1989-2003
ISSN
  • 0090-6964 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-9686
DOI
10.1007/s10439-010-9969-6
OpenAlex
W2123791769
Cited by
470
References
71
FWCI
131.67
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Adhesive/Dentin Interface: The Weak Link in the Composite Restoration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10439-010-9969-6
The paper
Spencer, P., Ye, Q., Park, J., Topp, E. M., Misra, A., Marangos, O., Wang, Y., Bohaty, B. S., Singh, V., Sene, F., Eslick, J., Camarda, K., & Katz, J. L. (2010). Adhesive/Dentin Interface: The Weak Link in the Composite Restoration. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-010-9969-6

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.