ArticleJournal of dental sciences2024
Accuracy comparison of scan segmental sequential ranges with two intraoral scanners for maxilla and mandible.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing Digital Impressions: A Review of Factors Affecting Intraoral Scanner Accuracy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Impact of dentition alignment, scanning strategy and operator experience on the accuracy and time of intraoral scanning: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Comparative accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scans using full-scan and segmental-and-merge strategies.The journal of advanced prosthodontics · 2026Article
- Enhancing Intraoral Scanning Accuracy: From the Influencing Factors to a Procedural Guideline.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Evaluating the feasibility of conventional and digital impressions of full-arch by the absolute linear deviation method: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Comparison of the Efficacy of Artificial Intelligence-Powered Software in Crown Design: An In Vitro Study.International dental journal · 2025Article
- Influence of operator experience on the complete-arch accuracy and time-based efficiency of three intraoral scanners.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Accuracy of intraoral scanners in maxillary multiple restorations: AnJournal of dental sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: The accuracy of a full-arch scan by using an intraoral scanner should be validated under clinical conditions. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions in the maxilla and mandible using two intra oral scanners with three different scan segmental sequential ranges. Materials and methods: A dental model with 28 teeth in their normal positions served as the reference. Sixty full-arch scans were performed using Trios 3 and Trios 4, employing scanning strategy O (manufacturer's original method), OH (segmental sequential ranges one half), and TQ (segmental sequential ranges third quarter). Trueness was evaluated by comparing digital impressions with a reference dataset using specialized software. One-way ANOVA and Tukey tests assessed differences between the groups. Results: For Trios 3 on the maxilla, no significant difference was found among the groups of trueness; in the mandible, strategy O exhibited a significant difference ( Conclusion: Strategy TQ exhibited the best trueness for Trios 3 and Trios 4, suggesting it may be preferred for higher accuracy. Clinicians should consider these findings when selecting scanning strategies and intraoral scanners for specific cases.
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.