SynthesisMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2024
Reliability of Extraoral Scanners in Capturing 3D Geometry for Dental Prostheses: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and associated factors of laboratory remakes in fixed prosthodontics: a multicenter audit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND This systematic review aimed to evaluate literature on the use and reliability of extraoral facial scanning/extraoral scanning in capturing 3D geometry in association with intraoral evaluation for dental prostheses fabrication. MATERIAL AND METHODS Two independent reviewers performed a systematic database search of PubMed-Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus with MeSH terms (keywords), including "extraoral Scanner", "facial scanner", "intraoral scanner", and "dental prosthesis" to identify studies on extraoral facial scanning/extraoral scanning reliability in association with intraoral evaluation measurements (from January 1, 2012 to June 1, 2024). The study was registered with International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42024544106) and followed the PRISMA statement. The focused question was "Does data obtained from extraoral facial scanning/extraoral scanning provide a reliable guideline in association with intraoral evaluation for dental prostheses fabrication?" The main measure used to assess reliability was the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Risk of bias was assessed using Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT). RESULTS Out of 1066 studies, 8 studies were included based on eligibility criteria. The studies showed that extraoral facial scanning/extraoral scanning captured 3D geometry of tissues with a high ICC, indicating excellent consistency and accuracy. Elevated ICC values (ICC >0.75; range 0.75-0.99) indicated that these systems possess the ability to consistently reproduce facial geometries, which is a critical factor in fabricating precise and comfortable prostheses using intraoral scanners. CONCLUSIONS The study findings support that extraoral facial scanning/extraoral scanning can be combined with intraoral evaluation and digitized workflow to provide high-quality dental prosthetics.
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.