
pmid: 277524
Twenty-two materials, including 19 dental impression elastomers, were compared in their ability to replicate microscopic detail. Some polysulfide, silicone, and polyether materials performed well. Curiously, microscopic replication ability generally correlated inversely with that expected from the nominal consistency. The test method developed appears to be a suitable microreplication evaluation standard.
Evaluation Studies as Topic, Polymers, Surface Properties, Viscosity, Dental Impression Materials, Silicone Elastomers, Sulfides, Cellulose, Ethers
Evaluation Studies as Topic, Polymers, Surface Properties, Viscosity, Dental Impression Materials, Silicone Elastomers, Sulfides, Cellulose, Ethers
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 15 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
