No abstract

No abstract

Sir, preprints are original manuscripts that authors post to Open Access servers before formal peer-review process. 1 I write this to inform readers of a recently launched Preprint Citation Index by Clarivate on its Web of Science platform, which will allow researchers to swiftly locate and integrate preprints into their workflows, improving productivity. The Preprint Citation Index covers several preprint repositories, including arXiv, bioRxiv, ChemRxiv, medRxiv, and Preprints.org, with additional repositories to be added over time. The scope of medRxiv encompasses all aspects of healthcare, including dentistry and oral medicine. 2 Due to the increasing use of preprints in recent years, they are becoming an important tool within the scientific domain for accessing cutting-edge research. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the advantages of preprints for rapid dissemination of information and promoting transparency in clinical research. However, it has also revealed the risks of disseminating false information through preprints. Preprints should be interpreted with caution, as the paper that currently lacks scientific scrutiny by an expert editorial panel and external peer-review process can be potentially incorrect. If preprints are not credible, especially in biomedical research, treatment strategies based on flawed studies or low quality of evidence can harm patients. 1 Recent technological advancements, like ChatGPT, have been the subject of numerous preprints posted to various platforms. These papers have helped identify both the threats and opportunities posed by AI bots, highlighting the importance of preprints in keeping the scientific community informed about new developments and their potential impact on society. 3 While preprints offer many benefits, it is critical to maintain quality control. By ensuring that preprints are accurate and trustworthy, researchers can continue to use them as a valuable tool for advancing knowledge and informing policy decisions.

Aims and objective: Precise reproduction of the intra-oral spatial relationship of implants with an impression becomes the first step in achieving an accurate, passively fitting prosthesis. This in vitro study aims to compare the dimensional accuracy of dental implants in casts obtained from open tray splinted implant impression techniques using two different splinting materials. Methods and Material: A mandibular acrylic model with four implant analogues was used as a reference model. Open tray impression copings were attached to the implant analogues and were splinted using two different materials. Group I-splinted with pattern resin, sectioned and re-joined and Group II- splinted with light cure tray material. Eight polyether impressions were made for each group and poured in type IV dental stone. The casts retrieved from each group were three-dimensionally analysed using coordinate measuring machine with 0.001 mm accuracy. A one-way ANOVA and post hoc test was done to calculate the statistically significant difference between the groups. Results: The present study revealed no significant difference in the inter-implant distances obtained from pattern resin splinted group, whereas, significant difference in z-axis  was found in light polymerising tray resin splinted group when compared to the values obtained from the reference model. Conclusions: Casts obtained from splinting the impression copings using pattern resin before making implant impression were found to be more accurate than splinting with light cure tray material.