Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Kok, P. De

  • Google
  • 2
  • 6
  • 111

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (2/2 displayed)

  • 2018Influence of dentin and enamel on the fracture resistance of restorations at several thicknessescitations
  • 2015Mechanical performance of implant-supported posterior crowns111citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Feilzer, A. J.
2 / 39 shared
Öztoprak, M. A.
1 / 1 shared
Kuijs, R. H.
1 / 2 shared
Kleverlaan, Cornelis Johannes
2 / 105 shared
Jager, N. De
1 / 9 shared
Kuijs, R.
1 / 2 shared
Chart of publication period
2018
2015

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Feilzer, A. J.
  • Öztoprak, M. A.
  • Kuijs, R. H.
  • Kleverlaan, Cornelis Johannes
  • Jager, N. De
  • Kuijs, R.
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Mechanical performance of implant-supported posterior crowns

  • Feilzer, A. J.
  • Kok, P. De
  • Jager, N. De
  • Kleverlaan, Cornelis Johannes
  • Kuijs, R.
Abstract

Statement of problem<br/>The fracture of implant-supported restorations, especially of the veneering layer, is a common problem in dentistry. Monolithic ceramic or resin restorations might help solve this problem.<br/><br/>Purpose<br/>The purpose of this in vitro study was to obtain additional insight into the risk of fracture of implant-supported restorations.<br/><br/>Material and methods<br/>Identical crowns (n=10) of 10 different ceramic and composite resin materials were cemented on conventional abutments on implant replicas embedded in polymethyl methacrylate blocks. The specimens were subjected to compressive load in a universal testing machine to record initial load to failure (ILF). Additionally, the flexural strength (FS), compressive strength (CS), and elastic modulus (E) of the investigated materials were determined. These results were used in a finite element analysis model of a composite resin and a lithium disilicate crown.<br/><br/>Results<br/>Anatomic contour zirconia (Lava Plus) crowns had the highest ILF (6065 N), followed by lithium disilicate (IPS e.max) (2788 N) and the composite resin materials (Protemp 4, Majesty Flow, Telio CAD, Estenia C&amp;B, Lava Ultimate, VITA Enamic) (2386 to 1935 N). Veneered zirconia (Lava) crowns showed the lowest ILF (1477 N). The highest FS, CS, and E were found for Lava Plus and IPS e.max. No direct relationship was found between ILF and the FS, CS, or E. The finite element analysis showed stresses that did not exceed the FS or CS of IPS e.max. The surface roughness of these crowns might have caused initial failure at relatively low stresses.<br/><br/>Conclusions<br/>In this laboratory study, monolithic implant-supported crowns showed a higher ILF than conventional veneered ceramic crowns. Monolithic ceramic restorations might perform better than composite resin crowns.

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • surface
  • strength
  • composite
  • flexural strength
  • Lithium
  • ceramic
  • resin
  • finite element analysis
  • collision-induced dissociation