ArticleDentistry journal2024
A Comparative Study of Shade-Matching Reproducibility Using an Intraoral Scanner and a Spectrophotometer.
Article in Dentistry journal, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Color stability of CAD/CAM and additively manufactured resin materials: influence of surface treatment and layer thickness - an in vitro study.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- A Multidimensional Analysis of Shade Selection Difficulty for Indirect Restorations Among Dental Students and Professionals.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Clinical comparison of different color selection methods with digital photographs using a button technique.Head & face medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- A comparative study of shade-matching performance using intraoral scanner, spectrophotometer, and visual assessment.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Clinical Use of Paraprobiotics for Pregnant Women with Periodontitis: Randomized Clinical Trial.Dentistry journal · 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
7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe compared the repeatability of the shade determination of resin composite restorations and acrylic teeth in light and darker shades at baseline and after an aging process through two digital tooth color-matching methods: using a Trios 3Shape intraoral scanner and using a Vita Easyshade Compact spectrophotometer. MATERIAL AND
methodsForty upper central incisor acrylic teeth in the shade A1 (
resultsData analysis was on the calculation of the arithmetic mean for the percentage of repeatability conducted by the Trios scanner and the Easyshade device. There was no statistically significant comparison between the shade measurement devices (
conclusionsThe intraoral scanner and Easyshade device are reliable for baseline shade selection, but their accuracy decreases after aging, particularly for darker shades.
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.