ArticleJournal of dental sciences2025
Comparisons of precision and trueness of digital dental casts produced by desktop scanners and intraoral scanners.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2025. 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.
- Comparison of marginal gap in implant-supported hybrid nanoceramic crowns fabricated by additive vs. subtractive manufacturing.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Accuracy of digital impressions captured by an intraoral scanner in a partially edentulous mandible.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Effects of restorative materials, colors, and surface finishing on the scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Trueness and precision analysis of crown margins on digital casts produced by various dental scanning systems.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Overview of the education system for dental technicians in Taiwan.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Current challenges of dental laboratory in Taiwan: The perspectives from a senior certified dental technician in a dental laboratory attached to a teaching hospital.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Review
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
Background/purpose: Different types of scanners are gradually used to produce digital dental casts in the current dental practice. This study tested the accuracy of the three desktop scanners and two intraoral scanners and evaluated whether the desktop scanners had higher precision than the intraoral scanners. Materials and methods: This study used the three desktop and two intraoral scanners to scan a standard dental cast 5 times. The 5 digital casts produced by the same scanner were compared each other to study the precision errors of each scanner. Moreover, 5 sets of the 5 digital casts produced by the 5 different scanners were compared each other to investigate the trueness errors among these 5 different scanners. Results: This study showed a significant difference in the precision error of produced digital casts made by the 5 different scanners ( Conclusion: We conclude that the desktop scanners can achieve a better precision than the intraoral scanners. When the intraoral scanner is used, the dentist should notice the possible model errors at the molar regions.
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.