ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Impact of Printing Orientation and Printer Type on the Accuracy of 3D-Printed Dental Splints.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Additive manufacturing has expanded the fabrication of occlusal splints; however, the influence of printing technology and build orientation on accuracy remains unclear. This study evaluated the effect of printing technology (Liquid Crystal Display [LCD] and Digital Light Processing [DLP]) and build orientation (0°, 45°, and 90°) on the trueness of additively manufactured occlusal splints under standardized conditions. A maxillary occlusal splint was digitally designed from a scanned typodont and used as the reference model. Specimens (n = 10/group) were fabricated using two LCD printers (Ackuretta SOL, Phrozen Mini 8K S) and one DLP printer (SprintRay Pro 95S) with a single photopolymer resin (KeySplint Soft). All samples were printed at 100 µm layer thickness and subjected to standardized post-processing. Trueness was assessed by comparing scanned splints to the reference STL using Geomagic Control X and expressed as root mean square (RMS) values. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests (α = 0.05). Printing technology and build orientation significantly affected trueness (
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.