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...
Published in: | Australasian Orthodontic Journal |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
2021
|
Subjects: | |
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 |