ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2025
Does Intraoral Scanning at the Subgingival Finish Line Affect the Accuracy of Interim Crowns?
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of four gingival retraction techniques on gingival tissue displacement and sulcus depth during digital impression procedures.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- Mapping Error Propagation in Intraoral Scanning Using Reason's Swiss-Cheese Model: An In Vitro Study of Precision Under Repeatability Conditions.Dentistry journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This in vitro study evaluated the internal surface trueness and the marginal and internal fit of interim crowns fabricated from intraoral scanner (IOS; i500, MEDIT, Seoul, Republic of Korea) data, considering variations in subgingival finish line depth and the use of gingival retraction. A right maxillary first molar was prepared using a milled ceramic abutment, with subgingival finish line depths set at 0, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, and 1.00 mm from the gingival crest. All specimens were scanned with an IOS, both with and without gingival retraction. Interim crowns were designed from the scan data and produced via three-dimensional (3D) printing. Internal surface trueness was measured using 3D inspection software (Geomagic Control X version 2022.0.0; 3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA), while marginal and internal fit were assessed with the silicone replica technique. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis H test (α = 0.05). In the absence of gingival retraction, internal surface trueness and crown fit decreased significantly with increasing finish line depth (
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.