ArticleCureus2024
A Comparative Study of Tooth Shade Selection Methods Between Visual, Smartphone Camera, and Vita Easyshade Spectrophotometer.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Multidimensional Analysis of Shade Selection Difficulty for Indirect Restorations Among Dental Students and Professionals.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Article
- Correlation between the color stability and contact profilometry results of different CAD/CAM ceramic materials after staining with black shammah and DZRT smokeless tobacco.Tobacco induced diseases · 2026Article
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
objectivesRecently, dental esthetics have increasingly emphasized appearance, with tooth shade selection complicated by the enamel and dentin's translucency and opacity. Smartphone cameras are useful for shade matching. Currently, no study has directly compared the accuracy of this method. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of the visual method, smartphone photography, and the Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer, particularly for chroma, value, and hue.
methodsThis cross-sectional study involved a convenient sample of 82 dental students from the College of Dental Medicine at Umm Al-Qura University, including those in their 5
resultsThe current study included 82 subjects; 42 were females and 40 were males. There was no significant difference between male and female students in the measured accuracy by using the three methods except for hue when the photo method was used (p=0.015). For chroma (p=0.094), value (p=0.965), and hue (p=0.094), the photo method was comparable in accuracy to the visual method. The accuracy was slightly higher for the photo method, but this difference was not statistically significant. The Easyshade was also comparable to the visual method in chroma (p=0.674), significantly lower when assessing value (p=0.002) and not statistically lower when assessing hue (p=0.094). Comparing the results of the same method, the accuracy of shade selection was highest for chroma, followed by value, and lowest for hue.
conclusionWithin the limitations of this study, digital photography using a smartphone camera may serve as a reliable method for clinicians in shade selection during clinical practice.
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.