Marginal adaptation of three-unit interim restorations fabricated by the CAD-CA systems and the direct method before and after thermocycling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited information is available regarding the marginal adaptation of three-unit interim restorations fabricated by different techniques from different materials. Also, the efficacy of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems for their fabrication is still questionable. This study aimed to assess the marginal adaptation of three-unit interim restorations fabricated by the CAD-CAM systems and the direct method from different materials before and after thermocycling. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A sound mandibular second premolar and a second molar were prepared for a three-unit all-ceramic restoration. Metal dies were fabricated to simulate a case of mandibular first molar missing, and were mounted in an acrylic block. Seventy-two three-unit interim restorations were fabricated by different techniques from different materials in six groups (n=12). In the first four groups, restorations were fabricated from Tempron, Visalys Temp, Unifast III, and Acropars by the direct technique, while the Amann Girrbach and Arum CAD-CAM systems and Ceramill Temp blocks were used in the last two groups. Marginal gap in each group was measured under a stereomicroscope at ×100 magnification. The specimens then underwent 5000 thermal cycles (5-55°C), and the marginal gap was measured again afterwards. ANCOVA and Bonferroni test (for pairwise comparisons) were applied for statistical analyses (α=0.05). RESULTS: <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Dental marginal adaptation, interim dental prosthesis, CAD-CAM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".