ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2026
Accuracy of Stereophotogrammetry Technique versus Intraoral Scanners for Complete-Arch Implant Digital Impressions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic literature review aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the stereophotogrammetry based dental scanners in determining complete-arch implant retained prosthesis compared to intraoral scanners (IOSs). The focused PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) directed was "Do complete arch implant (P) impressions made using stereophotogrammetry-based dental scanners (I) have the same accuracy (O) when compared to impressions made using IOS (C)?" Recommendations listed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) were used for structuring and reporting this review. This systematic review and meta-analysis was preregistered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) bearing the registration number CRD42024597913. To search the relevant titles, four electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were systematically searched in October 2024. The inclusion criteria include research papers published up to September 2024 in English comparing the accuracy of stereophotogrammetry-based dental scanners with IOS in recording the impression of complete-arch implants. Studies conducted on animals were excluded. Also excluded were unpublished reports, theses and dissertations, and case reports. After the initial search of the selected databases, a total of 590 titles were identified. The synthesis included 13 articles for qualitative analysis, but only 8 provided comparative data for quantitative analysis, which was performed using review manager (RevMan) Version 5.4. in non-Cochrane mode. The Modified CONSORT scale was used for
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.