ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2023
Linear Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners for Full-Arch Impressions of Implant-Supported Prostheses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- In Vivo Complete Arch Implant Impressions: Comparison of the Linear Precision of Digital and Conventional Techniques.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Impact of reference body position on linear and 3D accuracy of intraoral scans.International journal of implant dentistry · 2026Article
- Intraoral scanning for implant-supported complete-arch fixed dental prostheses (ISCFDPs): Four clinical reports.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2026Article
- Snap-On PMMA Provisional Restorations in a Full Digital Workflow for the Rehabilitation of Worn Dentition: A Clinical Report.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- A Comparative Analysis of Complete Coverage Tooth Preparation Design and Scan Angulation on the Accuracy of Two Different Intra-Oral Digital Scanners: A 3-Dimensional Study.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Marginal Bone Level Changes in Full-Arch Rehabilitation: Digital Versus Analog Protocols-A 5-Year Retrospective Study.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2025Article
- Effects of complete-arch digital scanning techniques on the passive fit of CAD-CAM verification devices.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2025Article
- Three-Dimensionally Printed Splints in Dentistry: A Comprehensive Review.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Intraoral scanners and traditional impression analysis for reliability between techniques in full-arch implant-supported prostheses: An in vitro study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Full-Arch Intraoral Scans Versus Conventional Impression: A Systematic Review with a Meta-Analysis and a Proposal to Standardise the Analysis of the Accuracy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The Accuracy of Digital Impressions versus Conventional Impressions in Neonates with Cleft Lip and/or Palate: A Laboratory-Based Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article compares the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs) used in the digital impression of full arches to fabricate implant-supported complete prostheses. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and was registered in the Open Science Framework (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/CPM9K). Six electronic databases, gray literature databases, and a manual search were performed in April 2022. Studies that evaluated the accuracy of intraoral scan impressions compared with conventional impressions in full-arch impressions were included for complete implant-supported prostheses. In addition, an adapted checklist for reporting in vitro studies was used to assess the risk of bias. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects Hunter- Schmidt model. Nine studies were included in the analysis. IOS impressions present higher accuracy (137.86 μm) than conventional impressions (182.51 μm) (
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.