2021
DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_137_21
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of two computer-aided design software on the adaptation of digitally constructed maxillary complete denture

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(5.1%) articles each described their use. Only of 6 (18,26,31,36,41,48) (15.4%) validation processes are not referred to in the articles, the rest were validated.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…(5.1%) articles each described their use. Only of 6 (18,26,31,36,41,48) (15.4%) validation processes are not referred to in the articles, the rest were validated.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…“CephNinja”, (46, 53) “Diagnocat”, ( 21, 50 ) “OneCeph” ( 24, 46 ) y “WearCompare” ( 22, 23 ) were the recurrent tools and that 2 (5.1%) articles each described their use. Only of 6 ( 18, 26, 31, 36, 41, 48 ) (15.4%) validation processes are not referred to in the articles, the rest were validated.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This is attributed to the speed, accuracy and the comfort of the patients with digitally manfactured dentures compared to the conventional ones. (14)(15)(16) In group II, the teeth positioning guide was designed to rest on the hard plate so that it act as an end point to verify the seating of the guide. (17) Also, the guide was designed not to extend beyond the height of contour of the teeth to allow the ease of insertion and removal of the teeth from the guide and to avoid any engagement of the teeth undercuts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%