ArticlePolymers2025
Effect of Different Printing Designs and Resin Types on the Accuracy of Orthodontic Model.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dimensional Stability of Printed Dental Model: Stability over Time at Different Storage Temperatures.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Influence of 3D Printer Type, Resin Material, Thickness, and Geometry on the Mechanical Properties of Directly Printed Clear Aligners.Polymers · 2026Article
- Influence of Build Platform Position on the Trueness and Precision of LCD 3D-Printed Orthognathic Surgical Splints.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of resin type and printing design on the dimensional accuracy of three dimensional (3D) printed orthodontic models, considering their clinical relevance for applications such as in-house aligner fabrication. Since low-cost Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) printers have been increasingly adopted in practice but data on their trueness and precision with different resins and print designs were limited, the study sought to provide evidence-based insights into their reliability. A mandibular model was designed using Blenderfordental (B4D, version 1.1.2024; Dubai, United Arab Emirates) software and fabricated with the Anycubic Photon Mono 7 Pro 14K (Anycubic, Shenzhen, China) LCD printer. The model was printed in vertical orientation using three different print designs at two layer thicknesses (50 µm and 100 µm). Four resins (Elegoo, Anycubic, eSUN, and Phrozen) were used, and each resin was printed with all three designs, yielding 126 models per resin and a total of 504 printed models. Dimensional deviations between the printed and reference models were assessed using root mean square (RMS) values and color-coded deviation maps. Significant differences in trueness were found among resins and print designs at both layer thicknesses (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.