ArticleBMC oral health2025
Comparison of three-dimensional tooth movements in virtual setups using different software packages for clear aligner therapy.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Considerations in Using Artificial Intelligence to Simulate Orthodontic Treatment for Implant-Prosthetic Purposes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Predictability of In-Office Clear Aligner at Final Canine Retraction: A Comparison of Interproximal Contact Tightness and Canine Distalization Between Virtual and Actual Outcomes in Premolar Extraction Cases.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2026Article
- Comparison of virtual treatment planning outcomes designed by two commercially available software in treatment of anterior teeth crowding using in-house aligners.BMC oral health · 2026Observational
- Effects of attachment design and location on derotation of mandibular second premolars : A finite element analysis.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 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
backgroundWith the advent of clear aligner therapy and their increasing popularity across the orthodontic field, many software packages have been introduced that implement the concept of virtual setups and consequently, the fabrication of in-house aligners. The objective of the present study was to evaluate and compare the differences in the resultant tooth movements when the same tooth movement values of virtual setups are implemented into four different software packages for clear aligner treatment, in patients with various degrees of dental crowding.
methodsForty-four stereolithography (STL) files of adult Invisalign
resultsStatistically significant deviation values were recorded between ClinCheck-Ortho Analyzer, and those recorded with both ClinCheck-Maestro and ClinCheck-Blue Sky in the moderate crowding group for the upper and lower models (p < 0.05). However, the differences in ClinCheck-Maestro and ClinCheck-Blue Sky deviation values were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). In the severe crowding group, statistically significant variances were documented among the investigated software programs, in contrast to the benchmark (p < 0.05). As per the reported outcomes, the highest deviation was attributed to ClinCheck-Ortho Analyzer, followed by ClinCheck-Blue Sky and ClinCheck-Maestro (p < 0.05).
conclusionsWith the same tooth movement values provided, the four examined programs produced diverse final virtual tooth setups, with greater variance in cases of severe dental crowding. This deviation arises since every software operates using a distinct algorithm, with a different segmentation method and rotation center for the moving teeth.
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.