↓ Skip to main content

Comparative fracture behavior of monolithic and veneered zirconia posterior fixed dental prostheses

Overview of attention for article published in Dental Materials Journal, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Comparative fracture behavior of monolithic and veneered zirconia posterior fixed dental prostheses
Published in
Dental Materials Journal, August 2017
DOI 10.4012/dmj.2016-391
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Lopez-Suarez, Veronica Rodriguez, Jesus Pelaez, Ruben Agustin-Panadero, Maria J Suarez

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and to compare the fracture load and the fracture pattern of monolithic and veneered zirconia posterior fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Twenty standardized steel dies were prepared to receive posterior 3-unit FDPs. Specimens were randomly divided into 2 groups (n=10): (1) Lava Zirconia, and (2) Lava Plus. All FDPs were cemented using glass ionomer cement and subjected to thermal and mechanical cycling at 5-55ºC with a 30-s dwell time for 120,000 masticatory cycles. All specimens were subjected to a three-point bending test until fracture. Data were statistically analyzed using Student's t test, paired t-test and Weibull statistics (α=0.05). No differences were observed in fracture load between the groups. Veneering ceramic fractured before than framework in veneered zirconia group. The fracture pattern was different. The tested groups demonstrated clinically acceptable fracture load values. Monolithic zirconia solves the chipping problem.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 33 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 37%
Materials Science 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 36 47%
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 10 September 2017.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Dental Materials Journal
#195
of 349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,980
of 324,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dental Materials Journal
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 349 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 324,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.