ArticleBDJ open2026
Self-perception of dental aesthetics and social media influence among students at a Palestinian dental school.
Article in BDJ open, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to evaluate dental students' self-perception of dental aesthetics, aesthetic treatment preferences, and the perceived influence of social media and to examine whether these outcomes differed by sex and training stage.
methodsAn online cross-sectional survey was conducted among undergraduate dental students at the Faculty of Dentistry, Arab American University, Palestine. A total of 246 students were selected via stratified random sampling by academic year and completed a structured questionnaire. Subgroup analyses were performed by sex and training stage.
resultsComposite resin was the preferred restorative material (87.4%), and natural white (A1-A2) was the most preferred anterior shade (79.3%). Teeth whitening was the most common aesthetic treatment (40.2%). Instagram was the main platform for viewing aesthetic dental content (80.5%); 70.7% reported a moderate-to-very strong social media influence on their ideal smile, and 47.2% considered an aesthetic procedure after exposure to social media content. In subgroup analyses, female participants reported greater dissatisfaction with gingival display. Clinical-stage students more often notice gingival defects and are more likely to judge social media-driven aesthetic outcomes as not clinically achievable under routine practice conditions.
conclusionDental students reported generally positive self-perceptions and strong preferences for natural, tooth-coloured aesthetics, alongside high exposure to social media and substantial perceived influence. Differences by sex and training stage suggest that aesthetic awareness and expectations may evolve with clinical experience. These findings highlight the importance of supporting students in critically evaluating online aesthetic content and communicating clinically feasible outcomes.
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.