The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
In situ Remineralisation of Enamel and Dentin after the Use of an Amine Fluoride Mouthrinse in Addition to Twice Daily Brushings with Amine Fluoride Toothpaste
Abstract
It is often claimed that 3 fluoride moments a day significantly reduce the caries risk compared to 2 daily fluoride moments. However, previous research is not conclusive. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the effect on lesion progression of 2 versus 3 fluoride moments a day. A double-blind, randomized, cross-over in situ experiment was designed. The experiment comprised 2 in situ periods of 3 weeks with a washout period of 3 weeks in between. Sixteen participants wore an enamel and a dentine specimen with a preformed lesion placed buccally in their partial prosthesis. The participants brushed twice a day with a 1,400 ppm F (amine fluoride) toothpaste and rinsed once a day with either 250 ppm F (amine F/NaF) or a placebo rinse. At the end of the experiment the specimens were retrieved for fluoride analysis and the assessment of integrated mineral loss with transversal microradiography. The fluoride analysis showed a statistically significant increase in structurally bound fluoride in dentine, but not in enamel, when comparing the fluoride mouthrinse group with the placebo rinse group. The amounts of loosely bound, KOH-soluble fluoride were not different between both groups neither for enamel nor for dentine. In dentine IML gain was significantly (p < 0.05) higher for the fluoride mouthrinse group than for the placebo mouthrinse group. In enamel no statistically significant differences in IML gain were found. For dentine a third fluoride moment may be beneficial in enhancing remineralisation, even under the remineralising conditions as in this study.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
For dentine, higher frequency of fluoride use is necessary to control caries.
“For dentine, higher fluoride concentration [19–23], higher frequency of use [24], or combination of methods of fluoride delivery [25] should be necessary to control caries; however, the evidence is not conclusive.”
From Validation of a Cariogenic Biofilm Model to Evaluate the Effect of Fluoride on Enamel and Root Dentine Demineralization (2016) · cites this paper as [24]
Citations
Cites
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/bf03193146 · Cited by 65,971
Fluoride mouthrinses for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents
Marinho, V. C., Higgins, J. P., Logan, S., & Sheiham, A. (2003) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd002284 · Cited by 395
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- 10.1016%2F0003-9969%2875%2990023-0 · DOI
- 10.1177%2F154405910708600504 · DOI
- 10.1111%2Fj.1600-0714.1974.tb01710.x · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000063929 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000084833 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000049109 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000063921 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000262089 · DOI
- 10.1177%2F154405910808701105 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000084804 · DOI
- 10.1177%2F154405910508400504 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000262112 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000075935 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000262050 · DOI
- 10.1159%2F000016496 · DOI
- 10.1111%2Fj.1752-7325.1993.tb02691.x · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fernández, C. E., Tenuta, L. M. A., & Cury, J. A. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0146478 · Cited by 74
Metadata
- Authors
- Laheij, A. M. G. A., van Strijp, A. J. P., & van Loveren, C.
- Venue
- Caries Research
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2010
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 260-266
- ISSN
- 0008-6568
- 1421-976X
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
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