ArticleHealth science reports2026
Attractive Levels of Dental Midline Shift, Midline Cant, Mouth Corner Asymmetry, Nose Deviation, and Chin Asymmetry According to Dental Specialists, Dentists, and Laypeople, Plus Their Asymmetry Perception Thresholds Under Sequential Viewing: A Diagnostic Psychometric Study.
Article in Health science 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: This study aimed to examine, for the first time, two sets of goals: (1) simultaneous effects of five sets of asymmetries in five facial features (midline shift, midline cant, mouth corner, nose deviation, chin deviation) plus judges' expertise level and demographics on facial beauty, and (2) thresholds of different expertise levels for detecting asymmetries in these 5 features. Methods: In the first part of this diagnostic psychometric research, 23 perceptometric pictures of a girl were randomized. Images had asymmetries in five dentofacial features: midline shift (0-1-2-3-4 mm), midline cant (0-2-3.5-5-6.5°), mouth corner elevation (0-1-2-3-4 mm), nose deviation (0-1-2-3-4 mm), and chin deviation (0-2-4-6-8 mm). Their esthetics were rated (6 Likert scales [0-5]) by 181 judges in three groups: specialists (Orthodontist/Surgeon/Prosthodontist/Restorative/esthetic dentistry specialist), general dentists, and laypeople. Simultaneous impacts of anatomical asymmetries and referees' expertise/sex/age on beauty were evaluated using mixed-effects linear regression/Bonferroni. In the second part, the same judges were shown a series of increasing asymmetries of each feature and were asked to select the smallest extent of noticeable asymmetry under sequential viewing. Their detection thresholds were compared ( Results: Specialists tended to give lower esthetic scores than both dentists and laypeople (who did not differ from each other significantly). All 5 anatomical features had significant esthetic roles ( Conclusions: Asymmetries in all dentofacial features and sex affected beauty perception. The most appealing forms were symmetrical. Asymmetrical detection thresholds were the lowest in specialists, followed by dentists.
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.