ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Clinician- and Patient-Centred Outcomes of Digital Impressions in Infants with Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- 'Digital impressions' for use in pediatric patients with cleft lip and palate.World journal of pediatric surgery · 2026Article
- Exploring Current Trends, Challenges and Future Directions of Intraoral Digital Impression in the Management of Patients with Cleft Lip and/or Palate: A Narrative Literature Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Technical Note of a 3D Printed Stimulating Palatal Plate Prototype for Children with Trisomy 21.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Article
- Awareness and knowledge of impression techniques for cleft lip and palate among dentists: A cross-sectional survey.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Enhancing Effective Scanning Techniques for Digital Impression in Neonates with Cleft Lip and/or Palate: A Laboratory Study Investigating the Impact of Different Scanners, Scanning Tip Sizes, and Strategies.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The Accuracy of Digital Impressions versus Conventional Impressions in Neonates with Cleft Lip and/or Palate: A Laboratory-Based Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review examines the effectiveness of digital impressions in infants with cleft lip and palate (CLP), focusing on accuracy, operator preferences, and parents' perceptions. The PICO-formulated focused questions assessed the accuracy and operator preference of digital impressions compared to conventional impressions in infants with cleft lip and palate, while also exploring parents' perceptions as patient-centred outcomes. Electronic and manual searches were conducted in five databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library; to acquire grey literature, Google Scholar was also consulted. Both experimental and observational studies that used digital impressions in the clinical care of infants with CLP were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Out of 503 records, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. The accuracy assessment included surface discrepancy and intra-arch measurements. Surface discrepancy studies showed variations in the premaxillary segments, while intra-arch measurements revealed no significant differences. Operators preferred digital impressions, citing reduced stress and streamlined workflows. Parents expressed a clear preference for digital over conventional impressions. The conclusions drawn were substantiated by weak evidence due to the limited number and the high risk of bias of the included studies. Challenges remain here, warranting continued research to enhance accuracy and assess parents' preferences, ensuring optimal outcomes for infants with CLP.
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.