ArticleFrontiers in dental medicine2026
Evaluating the accuracy of intraoral scanners across varied depths and widths preparation for CAD/CAM post and core.
Article in Frontiers in dental medicine, 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
Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of two intraoral scanners at different post space preparation depths and widths for CAD/CAM fabricated post and core fabrication. Methods: A total of 36 extracted anterior teeth were used in this study, which were divided into 6 groups according to the different widths and depths of post space preparations. Two operators carried out the intraoral scanning using two scanners: Planmeca Emerald and 3Shape TRIOS 4. Furthermore, the inEos X5 extraoral laboratory scanner was used as a reference. 3D point cloud processing software was used to analyze the impact of different widths and depths on the scanners' accuracy. Results: After ensuring examiner blinding, it showed that there was no significant difference between the 3Shape and Planmeca scanners. Additionally, longer posts resulted in lower scanning accuracy across the board, whereas wider posts tended to produce results that were more accurate. Conclusions: This study found that there was no difference in accuracy between the 3Shape and Planmeca scanners. The distribution of scanning accuracy at different post space preparation depths and widths showed that longer posts resulted in lower scanning accuracy, whereas wider posts tended to produce results that were more accurate, which provides information for the CAD/CAM post and core 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.