Cited by 192

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Remineralization of Enamel Subsurface Lesions by Sugar-free Chewing Gum Containing Casein Phosphopeptide-Amorphous Calcium Phosphate

Shen, P., Cai, F., Nowicki, A., Vincent, J., Reynolds, E.C.·2001·Journal of Dental Research

Abstract

Casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate nanocomplexes (CPP-ACP) exhibit anticariogenic potential in laboratory, animal, and human in situ experiments. The aim of this study was to determine the ability of CPP-ACP in sugar-free chewing gum to remineralize enamel subsurface lesions in a human in situ model. Thirty subjects in randomized, cross-over, double-blind studies wore removable palatal appliances with six human-enamel half-slabs inset containing subsurface demineralized lesions. The appliances were inserted immediately before gum-chewing for 20 min and then retained for another 20 min. This was performed four times per day for 14 days. At the completion of each treatment, the enamel half-slabs were paired with their respective demineralized control half-slabs, embedded, sectioned, and subjected to microradiography and densitometric image analysis, for measurement of the level of remineralization. The addition of CPP-ACP to either sorbitol- or xylitol-based gum resulted in a dose-related increase in enamel remineralization, with 0.19, 10.0, 18.8, and 56.4 mg of CPP-ACP producing an increase in enamel remineralization of 9, 63, 102, and 152%, respectively, relative to the control gum, independent of gum weight or type.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/00220345010800120801

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. 10.1016/S0022-5320(63)80017-9 · DOI
  2. 10.14219/jada.archive.1998.0113 · DOI
  3. 10.1177/00220345920710120801 · DOI
  4. Dawes C., 1991, Caries Res, 25, 225
  5. 10.1159/000260689 · DOI
  6. 10.1177/00220345900690111201 · DOI
  7. 10.1177/08959374940080021601 · DOI
  8. 10.1177/00220345890680060201 · DOI
  9. 10.1177/00220345950740121501 · DOI
  10. 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1973.tb01861.x · DOI
  11. 10.1177/00220345870660060601 · DOI
  12. 10.1177/00220345970760091101 · DOI
  13. 10.1111/j.1754-4505.1998.tb01353.x · DOI
  14. 10.1023/A:1008920201914 · DOI
  15. 10.1177/00220345950740060601 · DOI
  16. Reynolds EC, 1999, J Clin Dent, 86
  17. 10.1016/S0003-9969(00)00017-0 · DOI
  18. Sokal RR, 1969, Biometry
  19. 10.1159/000261026 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Shen, P., Cai, F., Nowicki, A., Vincent, J., & Reynolds, E. C.
Venue
Journal of Dental Research
Published
2001-12
Volume
80
Issue
12
Pages
2066-2070
ISSN
  • 0022-0345
  • 1544-0591
Cited by
192
References
0
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