Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38405645›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Evaluation of Three-Dimensional Digital Models Formulated From Direct Intra-oral Scanning of Dental Arches in Comparison With Extra-oral Scanning of Poured Dental Models in Terms of Dimensional Accuracy and Reliability.

Samer T Jaber, Mohammad Y Hajeer, Khaled Walid Alkhouli, Rabab Mohamad Al-Shamak, Khaldoun M A Darwich, Ossama Aljabban, Mohammad Khursheed Alam, Jehad M Kara-Boulad

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Incidence and distribution of white spot lesions after clear aligner versus fixed appliance therapy : A retrospective digital photograph and intraoral scan analysis.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Samer T JaberDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Al-Watanyia Private University, Hama, SYR.
Mohammad Y HajeerDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Damascus, Damascus, SYR.
Khaled Walid AlkhouliDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Syrian Private University, Damascus, SYR.
Rabab Mohamad Al-ShamakDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Syrian Private University, Damascus, SYR.
Khaldoun M A DarwichDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Damascus, Damascus, SYR.
Ossama AljabbanDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Damascus, Damascus, SYR.
Mohammad Khursheed AlamDepartment of Preventive Dental Science, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka, SAU.
Jehad M Kara-BouladDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Al-Hawash Private University, Homs, SYR.
Damascus University · SYSyrian Private University · SYAl Wataniya Private University · SYAmerican Association of Orthodontists · USJouf University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe study's objective was to assess the dimensional accuracy and reliability of dental digital models prepared by direct intraoral scanning and indirect scanning of the plaster models compared to the plaster models as the gold standard. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study included 20 patients. Nine had a class I malocclusion, seven had a class II malocclusion, and four had a class III malocclusion. Intraoral scanning was done for the upper and lower arches of all the patients enrolled in this study using an intraoral scanner (i700; Medit, Seoul, Korea). The next step was preparing the plaster model for the control group. Addition-silicone impressions were taken for each patient's arches. The impressions were poured according to American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) standards. Finally, the digital models of the indirect scanning group were prepared using a 3D desktop scanner (T710; Medit). In total, 26 measurements were made on the plaster and digital models. Paired t-tests were used to test for significant differences between the studied groups. The reliability of the studied techniques was tested using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Because of the multiple comparisons, the ɑ level was adjusted and set at 0.002.

resultsNo significant differences were found between the intraoral scanning group (20 patients) and the plaster models group (20 patients; P>0.002). The ICCs ranged from 0.814 to 0.993, indicating excellent agreement between the direct digital and traditional plaster models. There were no significant differences between the digital and original plaster models (P>0.002). ICCs ranged from 0.834 to 0.995, indicating excellent agreement between the indirect digital and original plaster models. No significant differences were detected between the direct and indirect digital models (P>0.002). ICCs ranged between 0.813 and 0.999, indicating excellent agreement between direct and indirect digital models.

conclusionBoth direct and indirect scanning techniques are accurate and reliable for digital model preparation and can be considered an alternative to traditional plaster models used in clinical orthodontics diagnostic applications. The intraoral scanning technique can be considered a valid alternative for indirect scanning of the plaster models to prepare digital working models during the digital design and fabrication of orthodontic appliances such as clear aligners.

Indexed as

accuracydesktop scannerdigital modelsintraoral scannermodel analysisorthodonticorthodontic modelsprecisionreliabilityvalidation

Identifiers

PMID38405645
PMCPMC10894623
OpenAlexW4392181140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.