Correction to: Scientific Reports, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-88201-2, published on 14 February 2025.
The original version of this Article contained an error in Table 3, where the N value was incorrect for ‘24 months’ for the Outcome ‘Postoperative hypersensitivity’. The correct and incorrect values appear below.
Incorrect:
Correct:
The original article has been corrected.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Dawoud, B., Abou-Auf, E. & Shaalan, O. Author Correction: 24-Month clinical evaluation of cervical restorations bonded using radio-opaque universal adhesive compared to conventional universal adhesive in carious cervical lesions: a randomized clinical trial. Sci Rep 15, 10072 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93290-0
Published:
Version of record:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93290-0
