| pubmed-article:12220343 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0226984 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0039593 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0205199 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0348080 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:issue | 8 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:dateCreated | 2002-9-10 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:abstractText | Although a great effort has been made to date with research on in vitro wear simulation testing, it is difficult to identify the relationship between the results of in vitro testing and in vivo observations. An intensive study into wear mechanisms is necessary for wear testing simulation. The objective of this research was to study the wear behaviour of three selected dental composites under different wear conditions to provide a more rational explanation for their wear mechanisms. Two typical wear conditions, two- and three-body wear, were conducted on the composites. The results showed that the wear losses had different rankings between two wear conditions. It is therefore unreliable to predict the clinical performance merely by wear loss ranking from in vitro wear testing. Further analysis on the wear surfaces indicated that three dental composites experienced different wear mechanisms under different wear conditions. It is concluded that in vitro analysis of wear mechanisms may lead to a better understanding of in vivo failure patterns. Similar wear mechanisms should be the premise for any correlation between the results of in vitro and in vivo studies. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:citationSubset | D | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:month | Aug | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:issn | 0305-182X | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:HoRR | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:ShortallA CAC | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MarquisP MPM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:issnType | Print | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:volume | 29 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:authorsComplete | Y | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:pagination | 756-64 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:dateRevised | 2006-11-15 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:12220343... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:year | 2002 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:articleTitle | Wear of three dental composites under different testing conditions. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:affiliation | School of Dentistry, Biomaterials, The University of Birmingham, St Chad's Queensway, Birmingham, UK. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:publicationType | Comparative Study | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:12220343 | pubmed:publicationType | Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | lld:pubmed |
