In the published article, there was an error in the Results section, 3.3 Compressive Strength and Diametral Tensile Strength. “The text incorrectly referred to ‘Figure X’. The correct figure reference is ‘Figure 5B’.”
The sentence was originally published as:
“The diametral tensile strength (DTS) analysis of the tested groups is presented in Figure X.”
A correction has been made to the section Results, 3.3 Compressive Strength and Diametral Tensile Strength, Paragraph 2:
“The diametral tensile strength (DTS) analysis of the tested groups is presented in Figure 5B. Among the evaluated materials, Group C (hybrid) exhibited the highest DTS value (8.4 MPa), which was statistically significant compared to all other groups (p < 0.05). Group D (control) exhibited a moderate DTS of 6.8 MPa, significantly higher than that of Group A (submicron) and Group B (nano), which demonstrated values of 6.2 MPa and 5.5 MPa, respectively. According to Tukey's HSD test, different lowercase letters indicate statistically significant differences among the groups (p < 0.05), confirming that the hybrid composition notably enhanced the tensile strength performance compared to the submicron and nano formulations.”
Author Bakhtinur Khudanov was erroneously assigned to affiliation “7. Faculty of Dentistry, Impulse Medical Institute, Tashkent Region, Uzbekistan”. This affiliation has now been removed from the article.
The original version of this article has been updated.
Footnotes
Approved by: Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.