ArticleClinical oral investigations2018
Impact of manual control point selection accuracy on automated surface matching of digital dental models.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- CBCT in Dental Research: Is Complexity Necessary? An Exploratory Proof-of-Concept Study.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- In Vivo Complete Arch Implant Impressions: Comparison of the Linear Precision of Digital and Conventional Techniques.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Influence of Superimposition Strategies and Landmark Distribution on the Full-Arch Trueness of Orthodontic Digital Models.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Alignment optimization in digital implantology: evaluating the role of scan body modifications and different software.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effect of the scan body alignment process on the accuracy of virtual definitive implant casts: a pilot study.The journal of advanced prosthodontics · 2025Article
- Evaluation of CBCT reconstructed tooth models at different thresholds and voxels and their accuracy in fusion with IOS data: an in vitro validation study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Upper Midline Correction Using the Mesial-Distalslider.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Computer-assisted preoperative planning system with an automated registration method in prosthesis-driven oral implantology.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2024Article
- Different Methods of Scan Alignment in Erosive Tooth Wear Measurements: An In Vitro Study.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- A Novel Self-Assessment Method for Training Access Cavity on 3D Printed Endodontic Models.Dentistry journal · 2023Article
- Evaluation of different registration methods and dental restorations on the registration duration and accuracy of cone beam computed tomography data and intraoral scans: a retrospective clinical study.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Observational
- The threshold of an intra oral scanner to measure lesion depth on natural unpolished teeth.Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2022Article
- Novel Anterior Cranial Base Area for Voxel-Based Superimposition of Craniofacial CBCTs.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- In Vivo Complete-Arch Implant Digital Impressions: Comparison of the Precision of Three Optical Impression Systems.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Accuracy of Dental and Industrial 3D Printers.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2022Article
- Reliability of Different Anterior Cranial Base Reference Areas for Voxel-Based Superimposition.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Hard tissue volumetric and soft tissue contour linear changes at implants with different surface characteristics after experimentally induced peri-implantitis: an experimental in vivo investigation.Clinical oral investigations · 2021Article
- Accuracy of Three-Dimensional (3D) Printed Dental Digital Models Generated with Three Types of Resin Polymers by Extra-Oral Optical Scanning.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Accuracy and eligibility of CBCT to digitize dental plaster casts.Clinical oral investigations · 2018Article
- Skeletally anchored mesialization of molars using digitized casts and two surface-matching approaches : Analysis of treatment effects.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTreatment outcomes are frequently evaluated based on the superimposition of digital dental models. However, errors from surface matching may distort these findings. The aims of this study were (i) to develop a simulation unit to mimic point set registrations and (ii) to evaluate the impact and clinical relevance of manual landmark selection errors on registration accuracy. MATERIAL AND
methodsTen randomly selected dental casts were digitized using a 3D laser scanner, and were loaded by an in-house developed simulation unit (MATLAB R2014a). First, the models were digitally duplicated and one surface was rotated and translated at random. Landmark-based registration was performed with 3 to 15 landmarks, and Gaussian noise was increased iteratively from 0 to 2 mm which simulated CP selection inaccuracy. Iterative closest point (ICP) matching was performed with and without addition of Gaussian noise. Finally, root-mean-squared (RMS) errors and Hausdorff distances were calculated, and averaged for each matching algorithm and noise level.
resultsSelection of 10 control points provided reliable registration even in the presence of noise. ICP improved registration results, but noise above 0.5 mm clearly worsened the outcomes.
conclusionReliable superimposition of digital dental models is possible if 10 carefully selected control points with deviation below 0.5 mm are used for initial landmark-based registration. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Potential registration errors should be considered carefully whenever superimposed digital dental models are interpreted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28681247What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.