ArticleDental press journal of orthodontics2026
Impact of different levels of diastema and crowding on the precision of 3D-printed dental models: a comparative analysis using digital superimposition.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to evaluate the impact of varying degrees of anterior diastema and crowding on the precision of 3D-printed dental models using digital superimposition techniques. MATERIALS AND
methodsA digital maxillary arch model was modified in the anterior region (canine to canine) to simulate three levels of diastema (2.5 mm, 5 mm, 10 mm) and four levels of crowding (3 mm, 6 mm, 9 mm, 12 mm), along with an unmodified control. Eight digital models were fabricated using LCD 3D printing, with 15 prints per group. Printed models were scanned and superimposed onto their respective reference models using Geomagic Control X. Surface deviations were analyzed via minimum, maximum, root mean square (RMS), and average positive and negative values. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post-hoc test were used for statistical evaluation.
resultsSignificant differences were observed among diastema groups (p < 0.05), with the 5 mm group showing the widest deviation range. RMS and average deviation values were highest in the 2.5 mm and 5 mm diastema conditions. In the crowding groups, significant deviations in minimum and maximum values occurred only in the 12 mm group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.008, respectively).
conclusionSevere anterior crowding (12 mm) and mild to moderate diastemas (≤5 mm) significantly impair the precision of 3D-printed dental models. These results highlight the importance of assessing digital model fidelity in cases with anterior spacing or crowding, to ensure accurate diagnosis and appliance fabrication.
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.