ArticleJournal of dental sciences2025
Trueness and precision of an intraoral scanner in digitally copying complete dentures.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: The ability to save a digital copy of a fabricated denture is poignant for large dental institutions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the trueness and precision of an intraoral scanner (IOS) in its ability to digitally duplicate a complete denture (CD) and evaluate the possible effects of file resolution reduction on different exported media types. Materials and methods: A desktop scanner was used to scan a complete mandibular denture and utilized as the control file. An IOS was used to scan the same denture and exported into both standard triangular language (STL) and polygon (PLY) file types and stored for additional analysis. The different file types at original resolution were compared to the desktop scan (DS100) to evaluate the accuracy of the IOS. Then the STL (Groups S100, S75, S50, S25) and PLY (Groups P100, P75, P50, P25) files were reduced in their resolutions to evaluate any statistical discrepancies in the volumetric analysis of the scan using the Hausdorff distance (HD) and dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Results: When compared to the desktop scan (14888.40 mm Conclusion: We conclude that the IOS used in this study demonstrates very high trueness and precision when digitally duplicating complete dentures.
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.