ArticleHeliyon2024
Impact of different CAD software programs on marginal and internal fit of provisional crowns: An in vitro study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of the Accuracy of Crowns Designed Using Artificial Intelligence Versus CAD/CAM and Traditional Methods.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Pooled it
- Marginal and internal fit of 3D printed permanent crowns: effect of CAD/CAM software, preparation type and resin material.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Influence of composite resin core buildup translucency on the accuracy of an anterior CAD-CAM bridge fabricated with a digital impression.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Article
- Verification of the accuracy and design time of crowns designed with artificial intelligence.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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Statement of the problem: Different CAD software programs used for designing crowns show variations in marginal and internal fit. Marginal and internal discrepancies may cause poorly fitting crowns. Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the marginal and internal fit of single crown temporary restorations designed using three different CAD software programs. Materials and methods: Dentbird, Exocad and Inlab 20 were used to design temporary single crowns using the same cement gap. Three experimental groups (n = 10/group) were formed based on the CAD software used. Geomagic Control X three-dimensional analysis software was used to compare the marginal and internal fit among the groups. Measurements were obtained at nine different thickness points. IBM SPSS Statistics, version 22 was used for all statistical analyses. Results: Among the CAD software programs tested, Dentbird produced the best internal fit on the buccal surface and the best marginal fit on both buccal and mesial surfaces. Exocad achieved the best values on the distal surface for both internal and marginal fit, while Inlab showed the best values on the mesial surface for internal fit and on the palatal surface for marginal fit. Conclusions: The Dentbird CAD software program provided the most accurate fit values that closely matched the design. The marginal and internal fit oftemporary crowns may vary depending on the CAD software used.
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.