Literature DB >> 284066

Perceptions of dentofacial morphology by laypersons, general dentists, and orthodontists.

B Prahl-Andersen, H Boersma, F P van der Linden, A W Moore.   

Abstract

Line drawings of facial profiles and color photographs of dentitions were evaluated subjectively by 1,150 parents, 72 general practictioners of dentistry, and 54 orthodontists with regard to the normality and abnormality in dentofacial morphology and the need for orthodontic treatment. A significant difference was found between the evaluations of the parents and the professional groups in ten of the 11 facial profiles and in seven of the 11 photographs of dentitions. In general, the parents considered more of the examples acceptable and not requiring orthodontic treatment than did the professional groups. The dentists and orthodontists deviated significantly in their ratings onjy in their judgement of "ugly duckling" example (picture 22, higher abnormal rating by the dentists) and the profile example 10 (higher abnormal rating by orthodontists). number of orthondontists may have associated the conditions in picture 10 with a Class II, Division 2 malocclusion and, as such, scored it abnormal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1979        PMID: 284066     DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1979.0456

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc        ISSN: 0002-8177            Impact factor:   3.634


  9 in total

1.  Facial profile parameters and their relative influence on bilabial prominence and the perceptions of facial profile attractiveness: A novel approach.

Authors:  Erin Stewart Denize; Fraser McDonald; Martyn Sherriff; Farhad B Naini
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2014-07-24       Impact factor: 1.372

2.  The perceptions of preclinical and clinical dental students to altered smile aesthetics.

Authors:  Maha Aljefri; Julie Williams
Journal:  BDJ Open       Date:  2020-09-14

3.  Clinicians and laypeople assessment of facial attractiveness in patients with cleft lip and palate treated with LeFort I surgery or late maxillary protraction.

Authors:  Eun Hee Chung; Ali Borzabadi-Farahani; Stephen L-K Yen
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 1.675

4.  Influence of bimaxillary protrusion on the perception of smile esthetics.

Authors:  Terki K Almutairi; Sahar F Albarakati; Abdullah M Aldrees
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.484

5.  Perceptions of Altered Smile Esthetics: A Comparative Evaluation in Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypersons.

Authors:  Amjad Al Taki; Mohammed Khalesi; Muftah Shagmani; Islam Yahia; Fatma Al Kaddah
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2016-09-28

6.  Influence of the Smile Line on Smile Attractiveness in Short and Long Face Individuals.

Authors:  Amjad Al Taki; Thar Hayder Mohammed; Ahmad Mohammad Hamdan
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2017-08-08

7.  Effect of frontal facial type and sex on preferred chin projection.

Authors:  Jin-Young Choi; Taeyun Kim; Hyung-Mo Kim; Sang-Hoon Lee; Il-Sik Cho; Seung-Hak Baek
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2017-01-25       Impact factor: 1.372

8.  Esthetic Smile Perception Among Dental Students at Different Educational Levels.

Authors:  Nebras Althagafi
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2021-05-07

9.  Self-perception of dentofacial attractiveness among patients requiring orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  Chris Johnston; Orlagh Hunt; Donald Burden; Mike Stevenson; Peter Hepper
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.079

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.