ArticleDental press journal of orthodontics2026
Comparison of three instruments (compass, digital caliper and 3d software) for dental linear measurements on plaster and digitalized models of infants and children: an agreement and reproducibility study.
Article in Dental press journal of orthodontics, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of the study was to evaluate the reproducibility and agreement of dental linear measurements made directly on plaster models with a compass, and a digital caliper, compared to digital measurements made through software on the same plaster models after digitalization.
methods40 plaster models from 20 infants and children aged between 1 and 5 years old, of both sex, with complete or incomplete primary dentition, with or without premature loss of primary anterior teeth were selected. The models were scanned using the Optical 3D scanner. Two calibrated operators performed dental linear measurements with a compass and a digital caliper directly on the plaster models and with the Autodesk Meshmixer software on the digital models. Six measurements were evaluated: missing tooth space (if any), arch perimeter, arch length, arch width, intercanine length and intercanine width. Statistical analysis was performed through the Jamovi program. Inter-rater reproducibility was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and agreement between instruments was analyzed using the Bland-Altman test.
resultsInter-rater ICC showed excellent consistency, ranging from 0.93 to 1.00. Agreement between instruments was good, with the mean difference ranging from 0.034 mm (limits: -1.077 to 1.145 mm) to -1.002 mm (limits: -0.831 to 0.185 mm).
conclusionDental linear measurements performed on digital models obtained from scanned plaster models demonstrated excellent reproducibility and good agreement compared to those made with a compass and a digital caliper. All measurement instruments can be reliably used in dental clinical practice.
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.