↓ Skip to main content

Perception of smile esthetics by laypeople of different ages

Overview of attention for article published in Progress in Orthodontics, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#44 of 255)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
275 Mendeley
Title
Perception of smile esthetics by laypeople of different ages
Published in
Progress in Orthodontics, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40510-017-0162-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chompunuch Sriphadungporn, Niramol Chamnannidiadha

Abstract

Age is a factor affecting smile esthetics. Three variables of smile esthetics associated with the maxillary anterior teeth and age-related changes have recently received considerable attention: (i) the incisal edge position of the maxillary central incisors, (ii) the maxillary gingival display, and (iii) the presence of a black triangle between the maxillary central incisors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of age on smile esthetic perception based on these three variables in a group of Thai laypeople. The smiles were constructed from a photograph of a female smile. Smile photographs were altered in various increments using three variables: the incisal edge position of the maxillary incisors, gingival display, and a black triangle between the maxillary central incisors. The photographs were shown to a group of 240 Thai laypeople. The subjects were divided into two groups: a younger group, 15-29 years old (n = 120) and an older group, 36-52 years old (n = 120). Each subject was asked to score the attractiveness of each smile separately using a visual analog scale. Smile attractiveness scores concerning the incisal edge positions of the maxillary central incisors were similar between the two groups. However, upper lip coverage was rated as unattractive by the younger group. A gingival display of 0 and 2 mm was rated as most attractive by the younger group. Upper lip coverage and gingival display of 0 and 2 mm were considered attractive by the older group. Excessive gingival display (6 mm) was scored as unattractive by both groups. A black triangle ranging from 1 to 2.5 mm between the maxillary central incisors was scored differently between the two groups. The older group was more tolerant of the black triangle size. Age impacts smile perception based on maxillary gingival display and the presence of a black triangle between the maxillary central incisors, but not of the incisal edge position of the maxillary central incisors. Due to the variation in esthetic perception of each individual, participation between orthodontists and patients for decision-making and treatment planning is a crucial process to provide successful results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 275 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 36 13%
Student > Master 33 12%
Student > Postgraduate 21 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 8%
Professor 7 3%
Other 37 13%
Unknown 120 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 130 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 1%
Unspecified 3 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 <1%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 <1%
Other 14 5%
Unknown 121 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 July 2023.
All research outputs
#7,208,166
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Progress in Orthodontics
#44
of 255 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,666
of 323,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Progress in Orthodontics
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 255 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them