ArticleScientific reports2026
A comparison of dental professionals' and patients' perceptions in assessing smile esthetics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smile aesthetics is one of the primary reasons for patients to seek aesthetic dental treatment. Although various parameters have been proposed to evaluate smile aesthetics, objective and standardised criteria are still under discussion. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the perception of aesthetic changes differs between dental professionals and laypersons. Frontal photographs of 18 patients were selected from 81 patient photographs. Two full smile images of 18 cases were shown to 86 professionals and 86 layperson participants. Participants were asked to mark the most aesthetic smile and the most important criteria in making their decisions on the prepared forms. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test for two-group comparisons and the Kruskal-Wallis H test for comparisons with three or more groups. The rate of choosing the aesthetic smile according to the SI was significantly higher in professionals (p < 0.05). In the non-professional group, teeth rate was significantly more often considered the main criterion for aesthetic smile discrimination (p < 0.05). The professional group placed greater emphasis on gingival appearance when evaluating smile aesthetics (p < 0.05). Aesthetic perception differed between professionals and laypersons. The Smile Index should be interpreted alongside other esthetic parameters and patient expectations.
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.