| Title |
Comparison of two intraoral scanners based on three-dimensional surface analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Progress in Orthodontics, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40510-018-0205-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kyung-Min Lee |
| Abstract |
This in vivo study evaluated the difference of two well-known intraoral scanners used in dentistry, namely iTero (Align Technology) and TRIOS (3Shape). Thirty-two participants underwent intraoral scans with TRIOS and iTero scanners, as well as conventional alginate impressions. The scans obtained with the two intraoral scanners were compared with each other and were also compared with the corresponding model scans by means of three-dimensional surface analysis. The average differences between the two intraoral scans on the surfaces were evaluated by color-mapping. The average differences in the three-dimensional direction between each intraoral scans and its corresponding model scan were calculated at all points on the surfaces. The average differences between the two intraoral scanners were 0.057 mm at the maxilla and 0.069 mm at the mandible. Color histograms showed that local deviations between the two scanners occurred in the posterior area. As for difference in the three-dimensional direction, there was no statistically significant difference between two scanners. Although there were some deviations in visible inspection, there was no statistical significance between the two intraoral scanners. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 126 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 11% |
| Unknown | 57 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 42% |
| Engineering | 5 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | <1% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 February 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Progress in Orthodontics
#159
of 255 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#329,290
of 454,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Progress in Orthodontics
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 255 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 454,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.