ArticleBDJ open2023
Intraoral occlusal adjustment time and volume required for CAD/CAM crowns fabricated with different virtual mounting methods (A randomized crossover trial).
Article in BDJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical performance of indirect hybrid ceramic onlay restorations cemented with injectable resin composite versus dual-cure resin cement: an 18-month randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Article
- Evaluation of relative deviations in virtual articulators for simulating occlusal contacts at increased vertical dimensions.The journal of advanced prosthodontics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo measure the required clinical time and volume of occlusal adjustment when the maxillary cast is positioned in a virtual articulator using one of three methods: digitization of a facebow-mounted mechanical articulator (group A), virtual Bonwill triangle (group B) or a 3D face scan (group F). MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this randomized, triple-blind, crossover trial; 11 participants were enrolled. Every participant had one molar indicated for a single crown restoration. Three crowns were designed and milled for every participant molar totaling 33 crowns. Each of the three crowns was fabricated with the participant's casts virtually mounted utilizing a different method. An impression was taken of the crown in place before occlusal adjustment. The occlusal adjustment was then performed and timed with the three crowns in the different groups. After the occlusal adjustment, an impression of the adjusted crown was taken. The pre-adjustment and post-adjustment impressions were digitally superimposed and the volume difference was measured. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the groups.
resultsGroup A showed the shortest mean adjustment time (3:44.59 ± 3:39.07) followed by group F (4:30.09 ± 2:01.50) and group B (4:35.30 ± 2:32.33). The mean adjustment volume for group A was (28 ± 19.1 mm
conclusionsA simplified approach in virtual articulator mounting appears to be justified in the construction of a single full-coverage prosthesis. Added labor, time and cost of more elaborate virtual mounting methods seem to be counterproductive.
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.