ArticleThe journal of advanced prosthodontics2026
Effects of restorative material, intraoral scanner, and digital workflow on the marginal and internal fit of CAD-CAM all-ceramic crowns: an
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the marginal and internal fit of CAD-CAM all-ceramic crowns fabricated from a polymer-infiltrated ceramic network material (PICN; VITA Enamic MATERIALS AND
methodsCrowns were fabricated in two experimental series. In series 1, CEREC Bluecam AC and CEREC Omnicam AC intraoral scanners were compared. In series 2, chairside and labside digital workflows were evaluated. In both series, PICN and ZLS crowns were investigated. Marginal fit was assessed using reflected light microscopy and the replica technique, whereas internal fit was assessed using the replica technique. Data were analyzed using rank-based two-factor analyses and correlation analyses.
resultsIn series 1, scanner type did not significantly affect marginal fit, whereas Bluecam demonstrated smaller internal gaps than Omnicam (
conclusionMarginal and internal fit were influenced by restorative material, scanner type, measurement method, and specific interaction effects. Series 2 findings should be interpreted as differences between the chairside and labside workflows as performed in this study rather than as effects of the digitization step alone.
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.