Skip to main content

Table 5 Scores for the attractiveness of the full-face images in normal facial height and comparison of the scores between different raters

From: Does different vertical position of maxillary central incisors in women with different facial vertical height affect smile esthetics perception?

Variable

Orthodontists (1)

Prosthodontists (2)

Laypersons (3)

Difference p value

Mean ± SD

Median

(%25–%75)

Mean ± SD

Median

(%25–%75)

Mean ± SD

Median

(%25–%75)

− 1 mm

51.70 ± 19.21

50 (37.50–69.50)

62.95 ± 20.39

62 (49–79)

68.47 ± 20.62

72.50 (50–85)

 < 0.001*a (1–2; p = 0.007) (1–3;p < 0.001)

− 0.5 mm

63.13 ± 17.64

61.50 (50–76.50)

65.57 ± 17.74

70 (55–78.50)

76.15 ± 19.69

80 (67.50–90)

0.000*a (3–1; p < 0.001) (3–2; p = 0.006)

0 mm

68.87 ± 18

70.50 (56.50–80)

72.40 ± 21.24

75 (56.50–90)

83.33 ± 15.63

87 (75–95)

0.000*b (3–1; p < 0.001) (3–2; p = 0.005)

 + 0.5 mm

65.28 ± 18.80

69.50 (50–81.50)

61.88 ± 20.82

65 (42.77)

63.53 ± 25.84

70 (40–85)

0.645b

 + 1 mm

53.70 ± 18.52

50 (40–70)

50.88 ± 18.40

50 (39.50–62)

77.77 ± 20.74

80 (72.50–92.50)

 < 0.001*a (1–3; p < 0.001)

  1. One-way Anova was used for comparison of the groups. Pairwise comparisons for the variables found to be significant were made using the Bonferroni post hoc test
  2. aBonnferroni was used for post hoc test
  3. bTamhane was used for post hoc test
  4. Difference is significant at 0.05 level
  5. * Means significant difference
  6. 1 = Orthodontists, 2 = prosthodontists, 3 = laypersons
  7. 1–2 = Comparison of 1 and 2; 2–3 = comparison of 2 and 3; 1–3 = comparison of 1 and 3