Perceived Smile Attractiveness by Undergraduate Students Across Different Disciplines.

Kiran Rehman, Kirti Saxena, Sadia Tabassum, Joey Wong, Joslyn Chua Hao Min, Mohammed Nadeem Bijle, Umer Daood

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in International journal of dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Kiran RehmanDivision of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, IMU University, Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia, imu.edu.my.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7759-1414

Kirti SaxenaDivision of Clinical Oral Health Sciences, School of Dentistry, IMU University, Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia, imu.edu.my.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4573-6129

Sadia TabassumDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Jinnah Medical and Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan, jmc.edu.pk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3907-7307

Joey WongDivision of Clinical Oral Health Sciences, School of Dentistry, IMU University, Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia, imu.edu.my.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1283-3363

Joslyn Chua Hao MinDivision of Clinical Oral Health Sciences, School of Dentistry, IMU University, Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia, imu.edu.my.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-0806-1109

Mohammed Nadeem BijleDepartment of Orthodontics, Pediatric and Community Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE, sharjah.ac.ae.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7205-9891

Umer DaoodDivision of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, IMU University, Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia, imu.edu.my.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6715-6972

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The study aimed to examine differences in perceiving smile attractiveness between undergraduate students across different university disciplines. Materials and Methods: Undergraduate students pursuing dentistry, pharmacy and psychology volunteered to participate in the study based on an extended invitation by the study contributors. Then, the students were informed about the protocol to follow as participants in the study in a scheduled session, whereby 24 modified images were presented, and smile-attractiveness ratings were sought on a 6-point Likert scale. The data were organised to examine differences in smile attractiveness perception among students with respect to factors such as discipline, skin tone in images and the tooth shades presented. The data were analysed using a three-factor ANOVA with a Bonferroni post hoc test at all levels, with Results: A total of 106 participants provided their perceived smile attractiveness ratings across the disciplines, dentistry (46), pharmacy (47) and psychology (13), with a mean age of 21.7 ± 1.68 years. A statistically significant difference was observed overall and with independent factors ( Conclusion: Undergraduate students across different university disciplines perceived smile attractiveness differently, with dental students discerning variations between tooth shades.

Indexed as

attractivenessdentistrypharmacypsychologysmilestudents

Identifiers

PMID42781135

DOI10.1155/ijod/6693205

PMCPMC13598436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

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.