## 4 Results  
Figure 3 provides a descriptive overview of the distribution of dental applications (Figure 3A), material types (Figure 3B), and 3D printing technologies (Figure 3C) by year of publication. While the results show categorical breakdowns, we emphasize that a single study represents many categories, and thus, visual patterns should be interpreted as exploratory rather than statistically conclusive. With this limited sample, dental restoration and dental prosthetic applications appear more frequently than dental implant and dental crown applications. Biomaterials show a slight upward trend in reported usage, while metals exhibit a modest decline in usage. When it comes to additive technologies, SLS technology was initially the most prevalent, while the introduction of new materials led to the expansion of SLA and DLP, respectively, as well as FDM technology. Figure 4 shows the Relationship map, i.e., the association between the class categories of dental applications, material, and type of 3D printing technology used in dental applications. The results suggest that \"Biomaterials\" are strongly associated with \"Power Bed Fusion\", such as \"Dental Restoration\" and \"Dental Prosthetics\". Next, the \"Metals\" are strongly associated with \"Vat Photopolymerization\" and \"Material Jetting\", as well as \"Dental Prosthetic\" and \"Dental Restoration\", with less association to \"Power Bed Fusion\" and \"Extrusion\". Lastly, \"Polymers\" show weak association in explaining dental applications compared to \"Biomaterials\" and \"Metals\", while also suggesting strong association with \"Vat Photopolymerization\", but higher association with \"Extrusion\" 3D printing technology, compared to the other two materials. In sum, from the materials, \"Metals\" are dominant, while in dental applications \"Dental prosthetics\" and \"Dental restoration\" are dominant applications. Therefore, it can be concluded that \"Vat Photopolymerization\" and \"Power Bed Fusion\" are dominant groups used in 3D dental applications. It should be noted that \"group\" implies similar technologies from the aspect of the functioning principle, e.g., technologies that include the use of a laser beam to obtain a finished 3D object, such as SLM, LDED, LP-DED, and SLS. Figure 5 shows the considerations of the characteristics of 3D printing technologies and materials in the analyzed articles, subjected to binomial test statistics. The results suggest that there is a lack of considerations (at least \(p\) < 0.05) in the domains of \"Tribological_Test\", \"Cytotoxicity\", \"Microbiological_Examination\", and \"Corrosion_Resistance\". It should  
Figure 4: Relationship map between dental applications, materials, and the group of 3D printing technologies used. Figure 3: Descriptive analysis of the following: (**A**) dental application; (**B**) material type; and (**C**) 3D printing technologies, represented by the number of articles dealing with these (\(y\)-axis) and publication year (\(x\)-axis). be noted that the \"Corrosion_Resistance\" test is only meaningful for dental applications that contain metal materials, while the \"Tribological_Test\" was used mainly for composite materials. From Figure 5, it can be seen that the \"Cytotoxicity\" and \"Microbiological\" tests were not considered in most of the selected articles, although they are two very important parameters. Considering that dental applications are implanted in the patient's mouth (jaw), where there is a permanent process of food digestion under the influence of the bacteria that exist in the mouth, it is necessary to perform microbiological tests to analyze the durability of a material (lifespan) under the influence of bacteria. Cytotoxicity is also a very important parameter because, over time, materials that are potentially dangerous to human health decompose under the influence of a number of factors.