ArticleScientific reports2023
Effectiveness of creating digital twins with different digital dentition models and cone-beam computed tomography.
Article in Scientific reports, 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, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence and Digital Workflow in Craniofacial Bone Tissue Engineering: From Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) to Personalized Bioceramic Implants.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Exploring the scope and applications of digital twin technologies in dentistry: a scoping review.Evidence-based dentistry · 2026Article
- PerioTwin-DeltaCRED: a validation-aware physiological digital twin for longitudinal periodontal treatment response prediction.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Integration of Digital Twin Technology in Orthodontics: A Scoping Review.International journal of dentistry · 2026Review
- Effect of implant angulation on the trueness and precision of intraoral scanning and photogrammetry.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- A scoping review of human digital twins in healthcare applications and usage patterns.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- The New Era of Holistic and Precision Dentistry with Integration of Digital Twin Technology: A Scoping Review.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Combined tomography and conventional impression with notch system to fabricate prosthesis with palatal obturator in patients with severe limited mouth opening.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Advances in Digital Technologies in Dental Medicine: Enhancing Precision in Virtual Articulators.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Recent Advances in Intraoral Scanners.Journal of dental research · 2024Review
- Definitions and Characteristics of Patient Digital Twins Being Developed for Clinical Use: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Comparison of Tooth Size Measurements in Orthodontics Using Conventional and 3D Digital Study Models.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Distortion of dentition may occur in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans due to artifacts, and further imaging is frequently required to produce digital twins. The use of a plaster model is common; however, it has certain drawbacks. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of different digital dentition models over that of plaster casts. Plaster models, alginate impressions, intraoral scan (IOS) images, and CBCT images of 20 patients were obtained. The desktop model scanner was used to scan the alginate impression twice, five minutes and two hours after impression-making. Using an IOS, the full arch was scanned in segments using CS 3600 and simultaneously with i700 wireless. The digital twins obtained from the alginate impression and IOS were superimposed with those obtained from the plaster cast. The differences and distances at each reference point were measured. Scans of alginate impressions after two hours showed the greatest discrepancies, but these were all less than the CBCT voxel size of 0.39 mm. Alginate impression scans and IOS are suitable supplements to CBCT compared to the plaster model. Accuracy can be improved by scanning the alginate impression within five minutes or by intraoral scanning of the entire arch with segmentation.
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.