ArticleOrthodontics & craniofacial research2026
Concordance Between the Occlusal Contacts Record Obtained Using an Intraoral Scanner and Carbon Paper.
Article in Orthodontics & craniofacial research, 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.
- Present and Future of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Orthodontics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the reliability of the registration of occlusal contacts through intraoral scanning in comparison with those obtained with the aid of carbon paper. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe occlusal registration was obtained at the beginning of the orthodontic treatment of 35 patients (23 men and 12 women), aged 15 to 30 years. All patients were scanned with iTero Element (Align Technology, CA, USA), occlusal records were also performed with carbon paper (AccuFilm - 8 μm, USA) and recorded in occlusograms. To verify the agreement between the two methods, the percentages of agreement and disagreement and kappa statistics were applied.
resultsThere was poor agreement between occlusal contacts recorded by intraoral scanning and those obtained with carbon paper in most of the sample (Kappa value 0.07 to 0.20). Most contacts were registered in the posterior region. It seems that the contacts registered as intense in the iTero, correspond to the contacts with the carbon paper.
conclusionsThe occlusal records by means of scanning and carbon paper presented poor agreement, but the association of both methods is indicated for the correct registration of the occlusion.
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.