Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 268

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical Study of the Influence of Ambient Light Scanning Conditions on the Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of an Intraoral Scanner

Open access
Revilla‐León, Marta, Subramanian, Sai Ganesh, Özcan, Mutlu, Krishnamurthy, Vinayak Raman·2020·Journal of Prosthodontics

Abstract

Purpose: To quantify the impact of ambient lighting conditions on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of an intraoral scanner (IOS) when maxillary complete‐arch and maxillary right quadrant digital scans were performed in a patient. Material and Methods: One complete dentate patient was selected. A complete maxillary arch vinyl polysiloxane impression was obtained and poured using Type IV dental stone. The working cast was digitized using a laboratory scanner (E4 Dental Scanner; 3Shape) and the reference standard tessellation language (STL file) was obtained. Two groups were created based on the extension of the maxillary digital scans performed namely complete‐arch (CA group) and right quadrant (RQ) groups. The CA and RQ digital scans of the patient were performed using an IOS (TRIOS 3; 3Shape) with 4 lighting conditions chair light (CL), 10 000 lux, room light (RL), 1003 lux, natural light (NL), 500 lux, and no light (ZL), 0 lux. Ten digital scans per group at each ambient light settings (CL, RL, NL, and ZL) were consecutively obtained (n = 10). The STL R file was used to analyze the discrepancy between the digitized working cast and digital scans using MeshLab software. Kruskal‐Wallis, one‐way ANOVA, and pair‐wise comparison were used to analyze the data. Results: Significant difference in the trueness and precision values were found across different lighting conditions where RL condition obtained the lowest absolute error compared with the other lighting conditions tested followed by CL, NL, and ZL. On the CA group, RL condition also obtained the best accuracy values, CL and NL conditions performed closely and under ZL condition the mean error presented the highest values. On the RQ group, CL condition presented the lowest absolute error when compared with the other lighting conditions evaluated. A pair‐wise multicomparison showed no significant difference between NL and ZL conditions. In all groups, the standard deviation was higher than the mean errors from the control mesh, indicating that the relative precision was low. Conclusions: Light conditions significantly influenced on the scanning accuracy of the IOS evaluated. RL condition obtained the lowest absolute error value of the digital scans performed. The extension of the digital scan was a scanning accuracy influencing factor. The higher the extension of the digital scan performed, the lower the accuracy values obtained. Furthermore, ambient light scanning conditions influenced differently depending on the extension of the digital scans made.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jopr.13135

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 268

Metadata

Authors
Revilla‐León, M., Subramanian, S. G., Özcan, M., & Krishnamurthy, V. R.
Venue
Journal of Prosthodontics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-12-30
Volume
29
Issue
2
Pages
107-113
ISSN
  • 1059-941X (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-849X
OpenAlex
W2995743808
Cited by
268
References
12
FWCI
24.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical Study of the Influence of Ambient Light Scanning Conditions on the Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of an Intraoral Scanner. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/jopr.13135
The paper
Revilla‐León, M., Subramanian, S. G., Özcan, M., & Krishnamurthy, V. R. (2020). Clinical Study of the Influence of Ambient Light Scanning Conditions on the Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of an Intraoral Scanner. Journal of Prosthodontics. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13135

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.