ArticleBMC oral health2025
The effect of cavity depth on accuracy of intraoral scanners in intra-coronal restorations.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the effect of cavity depth on the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOS) in intra-coronal restorations, focusing on trueness and precision as defined by International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 5725 standards. MATERIALS AND
methodsThree intra-coronal cavity designs with depths of 2.5 mm (n = 10), 5 mm (n = 10), and 7.5 mm (n = 10) were fabricated using 3-Dimentional (3D) printed tooth models. Scans (n = 30) were performed using the Trios 3 intraoral scanner, and accuracy was assessed by comparing scanned models to reference models. Trueness was measured as the root mean square (RMS) deviation, and precision was calculated from the interquartile range of average absolute distances. Statistical analyses were conducted using the Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction.
resultsThe accuracy of the IOS was significantly lower at a cavity depth of 7.5 mm compared to 5 mm and 2.5 mm (p < 0.05). RMS values were highest for the 7.5 mm depth, while the lowest precision was observed at this depth.
conclusionCavity depth significantly affects the accuracy of IOS in intra-coronal restorations, with deeper cavities resulting in reduced accuracy. This highlights the importance of considering cavity depth when planning IOS workflows. This study shows that scanning accuracy decreases when the distance between the cavity floor and the cusp tip exceeds 5 mm. Elevating the cavity floor with direct methods may help improve scanning accuracy and enhance restoration outcomes.
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.