METHODS: Elsevier's Scopus was used to search and analyze the 50 most frequently cited scientific papers. After the screening process, two reviewers arranged the articles in a descending order based on their citation counts. Each article was then cross-matched with Google Scholar. The articles were analyzed, and information including citation counts, citation density, publication year, authorship, contributing institutions and countries, article topic, study design, and keywords was extracted.
RESULTS: The literature search identified 2421 articles. The citation counts of the 50 selected articles varied from 117 to 580 (Scopus) and 206 to 1130 (Google Scholar). The year in which most top 50 articles were published was 2002 (n = 5). Among 105 authors, the greatest contribution was made by JO Andreasen (n = 12). Most of the articles originated from the United States (n = 12) with the greatest contributions from the University Hospital (Rigshospitalet), Copenhagen, Denmark (n = 6). Original research article was the most frequent study design (n = 34). The majority of the top 50 articles were focused on traumatic dental injuries. Among 131 unique key words, root resorption (n = 6) was the most frequently used. A non-significant correlation occurred between citation count (correlation coefficient = 0.127, P = .378), citation density (correlation coefficient = 0.654, P = 2.493), and publication age.
CONCLUSIONS: This study identified the top 50 most cited articles published in this journal in the specialty of Dental Traumatology. The publication year of an article was not significantly associated with citation count nor citation density.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this virtual analysis study was to compare the accuracy and precision of 3-dimensional (3D) ear models generated by scanning gypsum casts with a smartphone camera and a desktop laser scanner.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six ear casts were fabricated from green dental gypsum and scanned with a laser scanner. The resultant 3D models were exported as standard tessellation language (STL) files. A stereophotogrammetry system was fabricated by using a motorized turntable and an automated microcontroller photograph capturing interface. A total of 48 images were captured from 2 angles on the arc (20 degrees and 40 degrees from the base of the turntable) with an image overlap of 15 degrees, controlled by a stepper motor. Ear 1 was placed on the turntable and captured 5 times with smartphone 1 and tested for precision. Then, ears 1 to 6 were scanned once with a laser scanner and with smartphones 1 and 2. The images were converted into 3D casts and compared for accuracy against their laser scanned counterparts for surface area, volume, interpoint mismatches, and spatial overlap. Acceptability thresholds were set at <0.5 mm for interpoint mismatches and >0.70 for spatial overlap.
RESULTS: The test for smartphone precision in comparison with that of the laser scanner showed a difference in surface area of 774.22 ±295.27 mm2 (6.9% less area) and in volume of 4228.60 ±2276.89 mm3 (13.4% more volume). Both acceptability thresholds were also met. The test for accuracy among smartphones 1, 2, and the laser scanner showed no statistically significant differences (P>.05) in all 4 parameters among the groups while also meeting both acceptability thresholds.
CONCLUSIONS: Smartphone cameras used to capture 48 overlapping gypsum cast ear images in a controlled environment generated 3D models parametrically similar to those produced by standard laser scanners.
METHODS: After a thorough search of the online journals, a total of 482 documents were found using keywords such as "Orthodontic Treatment", "Aligner Auxiliaries", "Elastic Ligatures" and "Tooth Movement." The database research, elimination of duplicate studies, data extraction and risk of bias were performed by the authors independently. This systematic review and network meta-analysis included prospective studies and clinical trials to evaluate research that had looked at the impact of various aligner auxiliaries on orthodontic activity in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment.
RESULTS: Eight investigations of varying designs were selected for this review. The majority of investigations revealed that aligner auxiliaries significantly improve anterior root torque, rotation, and mesio-distal (M-D) movement, as well as posterior anchoring. They also significantly improved anterior root rotation. However, few studies have presented inconsistent or non-statistically significant findings.
CONCLUSION: Auxiliaries for aligners also appear to improve extrusion and other orthodontic movements, but there is insufficient evidence to support these claims. No research has examined posterior bucco-lingual expansion or tilting. Clarification of the effect of attachments and their related variables requires additional clinical investigations.