ArticleBMC oral health2025
Exploring mandibular asymmetry: insights from visual perception using eye-tracking technology.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Decision-Making in Unilateral Progressive Condylar Growth of the Mandible: Biological Insights and the Role of Proportional Condylectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe visual attention provides an objective perspective on how a stimulus take attention. In dentistry, one of the important facial determinants in esthetic perception is the mandibular asymmetry. The study aimed to evaluate the eye movements of the orthodontists and non-professionals on the images with different severity of mandibular asymmetry using eye tracking technology.
methodsThe eye movements of 26 orthodontists and 30 non-professionals were captured. Thirty images were visually evaluated for the presence of mandibular asymmetry by two orthodontists. 2 mm, 4 mm, 6 mm, and 8 mm chin deviation were simulated on the images and the images without asymmetry were considered as control group. A total of 50 photographs from 10 individuals were included in the study. Participants' eye movements were recorded using an Eyelink 1000 plus eye-tracking device (Sr-Research, Canada). Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used for statistical comparisons.
resultsThe number of fixations on the lower lip-chin area in either the right or left direction did not show a statistically significant difference. (F(1,000;59,000) = 2.133, p > 0.05, ). Time to first fixation was faster to the lower lip-chin area in 8 mm asymmetry condition compared to 2 mm (F(1,2) = 31.423, p < 0.05, η
conclusionsWhile the direction of mandibular asymmetry did not affect voluntary attention, an increase in asymmetry, regardless of profession, attracted more attention to the lower lip-chin area. While the 8 mm asymmetry caught the involuntary attention of orthodontists, the same did not occur in non-professionals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.