ArticleThe journal of advanced prosthodontics2026
Effect of implant depth on accuracy: a comparative study using intraoral scanner and photogrammetry systems.
Article in The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the influence of implant placement depth on the accuracy of five full-arch digital impression techniques: 2 photogrammetry systems (Imetric [PGI] and Oxo Core [PGO]) and 3 intraoral scanning (IOS) routes (standard IOS, IOS with crown-shaped [IOS+C], and IOS with laterally-extending [IOS+LE] scanning aids). MATERIALS AND
methodsThree master models including 5 implants with 2-, 4-, and 6-mm subgingival implant depths were fabricated. Implant positions were recorded using each of the 5 techniques (n = 15). The resultant scans were compared to reference data generated by a laboratory scanner. Deviations were 3-dimensionally assessed using root mean square values to quantify both trueness and precision. Angular deviations (AD) were calculated to provide a detailed assessment of spatial inconsistencies. Data were statistically analyzed (α = 0.05).
resultsImplant depth and impression technique, as well as their interaction, significantly affected trueness, precision, and angular deviation values (
conclusionImplant depth significantly impacts the accuracy metrics of full-arch digital impressions. The Imetric system outperformed the other groups. Since laterally-extending scanning aids effectively improved accuracy, it may be recommended as a clinically viable alternative to standard IOS.
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.