ArticleImaging science in dentistry2023
The effects of different metal posts, cements, and exposure parameters on cone-beam computed tomography artifacts.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of artifacts in cone-beam computed tomography from different intraradicular pins and cementation materials using different exposure protocols.Imaging science in dentistry · 2026Article
- Accuracy of working length determination using endodontic motors with integrated electronic apex locators: anFrontiers in oral health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study assessed the intensity of artifacts produced by 2 metal posts, 2 cements, and different exposure parameters using 2 cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) units. Materials and Methods: The sample was composed of 20 single-rooted premolars, divided into 4 groups: Ni-Cr/zinc phosphate, Ni-Cr/resin cement, Ag-Pd/zinc phosphate, and Ag-Pd/resin cement. Samples were scanned before and after post insertion and cementation using a CS9000 3D scanner with 4 exposure parameters (85/90 kV and 6.3/10 mA) and an i-CAT scanner with 120 kV and 5 mA. The presence of artifacts was assessed subjectively by 2 observers and objectively by a trained observer using ImageJ software. The Mann-Whitney, Wilcoxon, weighted kappa, and chi-square tests were used to assess data at a 95% confidence level (α<0.05). Results: In the subjective analyses, AgPd presented more hypodense and hyperdense lines than NiCr ( Conclusion: High-atomic-number alloys, higher tube current, and lower tube voltage may increase the artifacts present in CBCT images.
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.