ArticleScientific reports2024
Clinical and digital assessment of tooth wear.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retrospective 3D analysis of gingival recession and occlusal morphology based on digital intraoral scans: an exploratory study.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Assessment of tooth wear with intraoral scanned models in young adults.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- 3D intraoral scanner as an auxiliary tool for the diagnosis of dental hard-tissue conditions.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Correlation between intraoral scanner and 3D confocal laser microscopy in early measurement of enamel loss due to dental erosion.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Longitudinal Assessment of Dental Erosion in a Romanian Cohort of Young Adults: A Ten-Year Follow-Up Pilot Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Stress-Induced Depression and Its Effects on Tooth Wear in Rats: A 3D Dental Scan Imaging Perspective.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the assessment of tooth wear performed on digital models with the one conducted at the clinical examination. Seventy-eight volunteers (29 males and 49 females, age range 20-30 years) with at least 24 teeth, normal oral function, and a neutral transverse relationship were examined. During the clinical examination, dental wear was registered according to the Basic Erosive Wear Examination (BEWE) index. Subsequently, the BEWE index was blindly applied by two examiners on digital models obtained from the volunteers. Data were analyzed using weighted Cohen's kappa coefficient and correlation tests with a confidence interval of 95%. All volunteers showed signs of tooth wear. Anterior teeth showed increased severity of tooth wear than first molars. Early loss of tooth substance could be identified on the digital models, including in areas with challenging direct intraoral visual access. Approximately 50% of the scores based on clinical examination agreed with those based on examination of digital models (k = 0.543, p < 0.01). A moderate, positive correlation was observed between scores registered clinically and on digital models (Spearman's rho = 0.560, p < 0.001). Considering the rather low agreement between the clinical and digital scores, alternatives to using BEWE on digital models are needed.
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.