ArticleBioMed research international2020
Accuracy on Scanned Images of Full Arch Models with Orthodontic Brackets by Various Intraoral Scanners in the Presence of Artificial Saliva.
Article in BioMed research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- 3D Scanners in Orthodontics-Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives-A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Accuracy of two 3D printed guide plates in bonding orthodontic brackets.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- [Evaluation of the accuracy of three-dimensional data acquisition from liquid- interference surfaces assisted by a scanner head with a compressed airflow system].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2025Article
- Aspects of Occlusal Recordings Performed with the T-Scan System and with the Medit Intraoral Scanner.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Deep learning for virtual orthodontic bracket removal: tool establishment and application.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Effect of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanners: a meta-analysis ofThe journal of advanced prosthodontics · 2023Article
- A novel method for testing accuracy of bite registration using intraoral scanners.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2023Article
- What to Prefer in Patients with Multibracket Appliances? Digital vs. Conventional Full-Arch Impressions-A Reference Aid-Based In Vivo Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The transfer accuracy of digital and conventional full-arch impressions influenced by fixed orthodontic appliances: a reference aid-based in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- Trueness of intraoral scanners according to subgingival depth of abutment for fixed prosthesis.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Scanning Distance Influence on the Intraoral Scanning Accuracy-An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Effects of Orthodontic Brackets on the Time and Accuracy of Digital Impression Taking.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- A Comparison of Accuracy of Different Dental Restorative Materials between Intraoral Scanning and Conventional Impression-Taking: An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Scanning Accuracy of Bracket Features and Slot Base Angle in Different Bracket Materials by Four Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Bias Evaluation of the Accuracy of Two Extraoral Scanners and an Intraoral Scanner Based on ADA Standards.Scanning · 2021Article
- A 2D Photographic and 3D Digital Dental Model Analysis of Golden Percentage in Maxillary Anterior Teeth.BioMed research international · 2021Article
- Effect of the presence of orthodontic brackets on intraoral scans.The Angle orthodontist · 2021Article
- Comparing the trueness of seven intraoral scanners and a physical impression on dentate human maxilla by a novel method.BMC oral health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aims to evaluate the accuracy of scanned images of 4 clinically used intraoral scanners (CS3600, i500, Trios3, Omnicam) when scanning the surface of full arch models with various kinds of orthodontic brackets in the presence of artificial saliva.
resultsOmnicam (1.247 ± 0.255) showed higher mean maximum discrepancy values. CS3600 (0.758 ± 0.170), Trios3 (0.854 ± 0.166), and i500 (0.975 ± 0.172) performed relatively favourably. Resin (1.119 ± 0.255) and metal (1.086 ± 0.132) brackets showed higher mean maximum discrepancy values. Nonbracket (0.776 ± 0.250) and ceramic bracket (0.853 ± 0.269) models generally showed lower mean maximum discrepancy values in studied scanners. In mean discrepancy values, the difference between scanners was not statistically significant whereas among brackets, resin bracketed models (0.093 ± 0.142) showed the highest value.
conclusionIntraoral scanners and brackets had significant influences on the scanned images with application of artificial saliva on the study models. It may be expected to have similar outcomes in an intraoral environment. Some data showed the discrepancy values up to about 1.5 mm that would require more caution in using intraoral scanners for production of detailed appliances and records.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.