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

Abraham, Dax

  • Google
  • 1
  • 7
  • 3

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2022Comparative evaluation of the force required to fracture coronal segments reattached using different methods3citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Mehta, Namrata
1 / 1 shared
Sreen, Deepti
1 / 1 shared
Chauhan, Nishant
1 / 1 shared
Aggarwal, Vivek
1 / 3 shared
Jala, Sucheta
1 / 1 shared
Singh, Arundeep
1 / 1 shared
Gupta, Alpa
1 / 1 shared
Chart of publication period
2022

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Mehta, Namrata
  • Sreen, Deepti
  • Chauhan, Nishant
  • Aggarwal, Vivek
  • Jala, Sucheta
  • Singh, Arundeep
  • Gupta, Alpa
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Comparative evaluation of the force required to fracture coronal segments reattached using different methods

  • Mehta, Namrata
  • Sreen, Deepti
  • Chauhan, Nishant
  • Aggarwal, Vivek
  • Jala, Sucheta
  • Singh, Arundeep
  • Gupta, Alpa
  • Abraham, Dax
Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background/Aim</jats:title><jats:p>Anterior teeth are prone to traumatic injuries. Their management is necessary in order to maintain the pulp and esthetics. Various methods have been reported for fragment reattachment of fractured teeth but there is no consensus on which is the best technique. The aim of this study was to compare the force required to fracture reattached fragments using polyethylene fibers in vertical grooves on the external surface of teeth, fiber‐reinforced composite post and circumferential chamfer.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Material and Methods</jats:title><jats:p>Forty‐eight extracted maxillary central incisors were sectioned using a disk and randomly divided into 4 groups (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 12): Group 1: control group, Group 2: reattachment followed by placement of two external vertical grooves on the labial surface and restored with polyethylene fibers and hybrid composite, Group 3: reattachment followed by two external vertical grooves and filled with fiber posts and composite, and Group 4: reattachment followed by circumferential chamfer at the fracture line and restored with composite. The forces required to fracture the reattached fragments were measured using a Universal testing machine. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test. Pairwise multiple comparison procedure was done using the Student–Newman–Keuls Method.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>The highest values for force required to fracture were observed in the fiber post group and the lowest in the Ribbond group (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; .05). The fiber post group had significantly different results compared to the Ribbond and Chamfer preparation groups (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; .05). However, the difference of rank between the fiber post and control groups was not significantly different (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &gt; .05).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title><jats:p>The force required to fracture the fiber post group was closest to that of intact teeth followed by the chamfer and Ribbond groups, respectively.</jats:p></jats:sec>

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • surface
  • composite
  • size-exclusion chromatography