title: Perception of Saudi dentists and lay people to altered smile esthetics.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate and compare the perceptions of Saudi dentists and lay people to altered smile features.
  
  
  METHODS
  Thirty-six digital smile photographs with altered features were used. Altered features included the following: crown length, width, gingival level of the lateral incisors, gingival display, midline diastema, and upper midline shift. The photographs were presented to a sample of 30 dentists and 30 lay people with equal gender distribution. Each participant rated each picture with a visual analogue scale, which ranged from 0 (very unattractive) to 100 (very attractive).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Dentists were more critical than lay people when evaluating symmetrical crown length discrepancies. Compared to lay people, Saudi dentists gave lower ratings to a crown length discrepancy of >2 mm (P < 0.001), crown width discrepancy of ⩾2 mm (P < 0.05), change in gingiva to lip distance of ⩾2 mm (P < 0.01), and midline deviation of >1 mm (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between dentists and lay people towards alterations in the gingival level of the lateral incisors or towards a space between the central incisors. No significant sex difference was seen across the groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In this sample, Saudi dentists gave significantly lower attractiveness scores to crown length and crown width discrepancies, midline deviations, and changes in gingiva to lip distance compared to Saudi lay people.
authors: Department of Pediatrics Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
authors: Nabeel
authors: N
authors: Talic
authors: Samar
authors: S
authors: Alomar
authors: Asma
authors: A
authors: Almaidhan
keywords: Lay people; Perception; Saudi dentists; Smile esthetics
references: J Esthet Dent. 1999;11(6):311-24
references: 10825866
references: Dent Clin North Am. 1989 Apr;33(2):157-64
references: 2656315
references: J Prosthet Dent. 2003 Mar;89(3):282-5
references: 12644804
references: Semin Orthod. 1997 Mar;3(1):3-20
references: 9206469
references: J Orthod. 2004 Sep;31(3):204-9; discussion 201
references: 15489364
references: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005 Feb;127(2):208-13; quiz 261
references: 15750540
references: Semin Orthod. 1998 Sep;4(3):146-52
references: 9807151
references: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1989 Jun;17(3):162-3
references: 2786794
references: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006 Aug;130(2):141-51
references: 16905057
references: Eur J Orthod. 1999 Oct;21(5):517-22
references: 10565092
references: Br J Orthod. 1990 May;17(2):115-8
references: 2192761
references: Semin Orthod. 1996 Mar;2(1):21-30
references: 9161280
references: Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2005 Jul;17(6):405-12; quiz 414
references: 16185029