Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33994813›Full record

ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry2021

Esthetic Smile Perception Among Dental Students at Different Educational Levels.

Nebras Althagafi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Influence of Dental Education on Esthetics Self-Perception and Shade Selection.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nebras AlthagafiDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, AlMadinah AlMunawwarah, 42353, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-7853-4809
Taibah University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the perception of six esthetic components of the smile among dental students and whether such a perception was influenced by different education levels and gender. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was an analytical cross-sectional study. A self-administered questionnaire was applied to all students (n=182) at clinical levels (year four and five) to evaluate a total of 6 ideal images (smile arc [SA], buccal corridor [BC], gingival display [GD], midline diastema [MD], crown length [CL] and width [CW]). In addition, students were asked to evaluate 20 altered images of these ideal images. A 10-point visual analogue scale was used to assess the ideal images, with the right end of the scale labeled "attractive smile" and represented by the number 10 and the left end of the scale labeled "unattractive smile" and represented by the number 0. The opposite scoring was applied for the altered esthetics smile images. Descriptive statistics was run to report sample characteristics, and the Mann-Whitney

resultsThe response rate was 80% (77 females and 68 males). Students at level five scored statistically significantly (p<0.001) higher towered attractive esthetic smile in ideal SA, while students at level four scored statistically significantly (p=0.016 and 0.006, respectively) higher towered attractive esthetic smile in ideal GD and CL. At altered smile esthetics images evaluation, fifth year dental students scored statistically significantly (p=0.030, 0.026 and 0.028, respectively) higher towered unattractive esthetic smile in two altered images of SA and one of BC. In contrast, fourth year dental students scored statistically significantly (p=0.022, 0.048, 0.027, respectively) higher towered unattractive esthetic smile in one altered image of GD, midline diastema and crown width. Males in year four were more likely to score higher than females for ideal images meanwhile females in year five scored higher than males towards attractive smile in ideal images. Males and females differences in scoring ideal images on both levels were generally non-significant (P>0.05) although males were statistically significantly to score higher than females towards unattractive images in both levels (p<0.05).

conclusionDental students at the fifth-year level of study had higher perception of esthetic components of smile than those at the fourth-year level. At each level of study, female dental students apparently had higher perceptions of smile esthetics than males.

Indexed as

beautydental studentsdentistrygender differencesorthodonticsperceptionsmile

Identifiers

PMID33994813
PMCPMC8112856
OpenAlexW3159500185

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.