Comparison of the occlusal contact area of virtual models and actual models: a comparative in vitro study on Class I and Class II malocclusion models
Hyemin Lee; Jooly Cha; Youn-Sic Chun; Minji Kim · 2018 · BMC Oral Health
WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate
The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.
Abstract
Abstract Backgrounds The occlusal registration of virtual models taken by intraoral scanners sometimes shows patterns which seem much different from the patients’ occlusion. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the accuracy of virtual occlusion by comparing virtual occlusal contact area with actual occlusal contact area using a plaster model in vitro. Methods Plaster dental models, 24 sets of Class I models and 20 sets of Class II models, were divided into a Molar, Premolar, and Anterior group. The occlusal contact areas calculated by the Prescale method and the virtual occlusion by scanning
Abstract by Hyemin Lee; Jooly Cha; Youn-Sic Chun; Minji Kim, BMC Oral Health (2018) — licensed CC BY 4.0.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study
Negative / Null Result ReportBioactivity evaluation of three calcium silicate‐based endodontic materials
Negative / Null Result ReportIncidence of impacted mandibular and maxillary third molars-a radiographic study in a Southeast Iran population
Negative / Null Result ReportAnti‐infective therapy of peri‐implantitis with adjunctive local drug delivery or photodynamic therapy: 12‐month outcomes of a randomized controlled clinical trial
Negative / Null Result ReportExploring the genetic basis of chronic periodontitis: a genome-wide association study
Negative / Null Result ReportIn Vitro Biofilm Formation on Titanium and Zirconia Implant Surfaces
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: DOAJ · DOI 10.1186/s12903-018-0566-7