ArticleBioinformation2026
Assessment of buccal corridor, maxillary interincisal midline and gingival display during smiling: A digital photographic analysis.
Article in Bioinformation, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective assessment of key smile aesthetic parameters such as buccal corridor width, midline deviation and gingival display remains insufficiently standardized across populations. Therefore, it is of interest to evaluate these parameters in 200 young adults with natural dentition using calibrated digital photographic analysis and software-based measurements. Standardized frontal smile photographs were analyzed to determine buccal corridor width ratio, maxillary midline deviation relative to facial midline and gingival display classification. The results showed a mean buccal corridor width ratio of 72.84 ± 6.32%, centered midline in 78.3% of participants and average gingival display in 55.0%, with significant gender differences observed in buccal corridor and gingival display. Thus, we show that moderate buccal corridor width, centered midline and average gingival display are common features, with minor midline deviations within 2 mm being clinically acceptable, supporting the use of digital photographic analysis for reliable aesthetic evaluation.
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.