Perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings

Abstract Aim To evaluate the perception of smile aesthetics and midline deviation considered by orthodontists (ORT), dentists (DT), patient’s-relatives (PR), and laypersons (LP) using an eye-tracking device and survey. Methods The study invited the participation of 42 orthodontists, 51 dentists, 50...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Australasian Orthodontic Journal
Main Authors: Aşik, Sümeyye, Kök, Hatice
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Walter de Gruyter GmbH 2021
Subjects:
DML
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.21307/aoj-2021.020
https://www.sciendo.com/pdf/10.21307/aoj-2021.020
id crdegruyter:10.21307/aoj-2021.020
record_format openpolar
spelling crdegruyter:10.21307/aoj-2021.020 2024-09-15T18:03:50+00:00 Perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings Aşik, Sümeyye Kök, Hatice 2021 http://dx.doi.org/10.21307/aoj-2021.020 https://www.sciendo.com/pdf/10.21307/aoj-2021.020 en eng Walter de Gruyter GmbH http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 Australasian Orthodontic Journal volume 37, issue 2, page 187-196 ISSN 2207-7480 journal-article 2021 crdegruyter https://doi.org/10.21307/aoj-2021.020 2024-07-15T04:11:23Z Abstract Aim To evaluate the perception of smile aesthetics and midline deviation considered by orthodontists (ORT), dentists (DT), patient’s-relatives (PR), and laypersons (LP) using an eye-tracking device and survey. Methods The study invited the participation of 42 orthodontists, 51 dentists, 50 patient-relatives, and 52 laypersons. A posed smile photograph of a female was chosen as a base image. The dental midline (DML) was digitally moved 1 mm (DML1R, DML1L), 2 mm (DML2R, DML2L), 3 mm (DML3R, DML3L), and 4 mm (DML4R, DML4L) on the base image’s right (DMLR) and left (DMLL) segments. Eight modified images were subsequently obtained. The base, modified, and repeated images were randomly arranged and uploaded into the Tobii Pro Lab software program for assessment by the participants. An eye-tracking dataset included first fixation duration (FFD), total fixation duration (TFD), and visit counts (VC). The participants also evaluated the photographs on the survey forms via a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and a Likert scale. The intra-group relations and inter-group correlations were evaluated statistically. Results The TFD for the DML2R photograph was found to be statistically significant between the assessment groups ( p = 0.026). While the longest fixation time (0.93 sec) belonged to the orthodontists, it was observed that the patient relatives had the shortest fixation time (0.51 sec). The VAS score for the DML2R image was found to be highest in laypersons ( p < 0.001). In general, the survey scores of the patient relatives and laypersons were higher. Conclusion The fixation time between the participant groups increased when there was a 2 mm deviation. A 2 mm shift in the DML was noticed by all participant groups and was considered unaesthetic. Article in Journal/Newspaper DML De Gruyter Australasian Orthodontic Journal 37 2 187 196
institution Open Polar
collection De Gruyter
op_collection_id crdegruyter
language English
description Abstract Aim To evaluate the perception of smile aesthetics and midline deviation considered by orthodontists (ORT), dentists (DT), patient’s-relatives (PR), and laypersons (LP) using an eye-tracking device and survey. Methods The study invited the participation of 42 orthodontists, 51 dentists, 50 patient-relatives, and 52 laypersons. A posed smile photograph of a female was chosen as a base image. The dental midline (DML) was digitally moved 1 mm (DML1R, DML1L), 2 mm (DML2R, DML2L), 3 mm (DML3R, DML3L), and 4 mm (DML4R, DML4L) on the base image’s right (DMLR) and left (DMLL) segments. Eight modified images were subsequently obtained. The base, modified, and repeated images were randomly arranged and uploaded into the Tobii Pro Lab software program for assessment by the participants. An eye-tracking dataset included first fixation duration (FFD), total fixation duration (TFD), and visit counts (VC). The participants also evaluated the photographs on the survey forms via a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and a Likert scale. The intra-group relations and inter-group correlations were evaluated statistically. Results The TFD for the DML2R photograph was found to be statistically significant between the assessment groups ( p = 0.026). While the longest fixation time (0.93 sec) belonged to the orthodontists, it was observed that the patient relatives had the shortest fixation time (0.51 sec). The VAS score for the DML2R image was found to be highest in laypersons ( p < 0.001). In general, the survey scores of the patient relatives and laypersons were higher. Conclusion The fixation time between the participant groups increased when there was a 2 mm deviation. A 2 mm shift in the DML was noticed by all participant groups and was considered unaesthetic.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Aşik, Sümeyye
Kök, Hatice
spellingShingle Aşik, Sümeyye
Kök, Hatice
Perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings
author_facet Aşik, Sümeyye
Kök, Hatice
author_sort Aşik, Sümeyye
title Perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings
title_short Perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings
title_full Perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings
title_fullStr Perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings
title_full_unstemmed Perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings
title_sort perception of dental midline deviation and smile attractiveness by eye-tracking and aesthetic ratings
publisher Walter de Gruyter GmbH
publishDate 2021
url http://dx.doi.org/10.21307/aoj-2021.020
https://www.sciendo.com/pdf/10.21307/aoj-2021.020
genre DML
genre_facet DML
op_source Australasian Orthodontic Journal
volume 37, issue 2, page 187-196
ISSN 2207-7480
op_rights http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
op_doi https://doi.org/10.21307/aoj-2021.020
container_title Australasian Orthodontic Journal
container_volume 37
container_issue 2
container_start_page 187
op_container_end_page 196
_version_ 1810441295314812928