## 3 Results  
### Study Selection  
The initial search yielded 3456 articles. After removing duplicates and screening the titles and abstracts, 34 full-text articles were reviewed for eligibility. Of these, 23 were excluded due to irrelevant outcomes, such as focusing on material properties rather than fit accuracy or containing insufficient data on comparative fit accuracy between conventional and digital methods (Table 1). Ultimately, eleven studies met the inclusion criteria and seven were included in the meta-analysis. The study selection process is summarized in Figure 1 (PRISMA flow diagram).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Study** & **Reason for Exclusion** \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2023 [8] & Focused on fracture loads rather than fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2005 [9] & Focused on the materials’ retentive force and deformation, not fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2018 [10] & Focused on educational aspects, not relevant to fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2020 [11] & Focused on digital visualization, not on the comparative fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2024 [12] & Focused on retention and trueness of clasps, not overall fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2022 [13] & Focused on retentive forces, irrelevant to the focus on fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2024 [14] & Focused on the restoration process, not comparative fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2023 [15] & Focused on 3D printing parameters, not directly focused on comparative fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2021 [16] & Focused on retentive forces and dimensional stability, not fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2024 [17] & Surface roughness focus was excluded. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2022 [18] & Focused on optimization of 3D printing parameters, not fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON], 2000 [19] & Crown fabrication focus, irrelevant to fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2022 [20] & Focused on microstructure and retentive forces, not the comparative fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2023 [21] & Lacked direct comparative data on fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON], 2021 [22] & Focused on material properties of PEEK clasps, not fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON], 2024 [23] & Focused on material properties (wettability), irrelevant to fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2020 [24] & Focused on mechanical properties of PEEK clasps via finite element analysis. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2023 [25] & Focused on the use of horizontal constraint forces with strain gauges, indirectly focused on fit by measuring forces instead of gap size or seating accuracy, which might deviate from the direct outcome measures. \\ \hline [PERSON], 2019 [26] & Focused on material properties of PEEK clasps, not fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2018 [27] & Included mechanical properties, deviating from the focus on fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2023 [28] & Focused on retention and fatigue resistance of PEEK clasps, not fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2022 [29] & Focused on dimensional accuracy of PEEK clasps, not overall fit accuracy. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al., 2022 [4] & Focused on fatigue behavior of clasp materials, not fit accuracy. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Excluded studies after full-text screening and reasons for exclusion.