Skip to main content

Table 6 Results of comparing VAS scores for HAP images

From: The relationship between different levels of facial attractiveness and malocclusion perception: an eye tracking and survey study

 

Photographs

p value

P0

P1

P2

P3

P4

P5

P6

P7

Orthodontist

5.92 ± 1.56A

6.22 ± 1.98A

6.08 ± 1.59A

3.92 ± 1.84A

2.60 ± 1.70A

3.54 ± 1.75A

3.26 ± 1.58A

3.04 ± 1.62A

 < .001β

Dentist

6.28 ± 1.75AB

6.26 ± 1.91A

6.72 ± 1.84AC

4.24 ± 2.05A

2.72 ± 1.50A

3.44 ± 1.47A

3.40 ± 1.46A

3.44 ± 1.79A

 < .001β

Orthodontic Patient

6.86 ± 1.76B

7.10 ± 2.06AB

7.46 ± 2.12BC

5.84 ± 2.58B

4.10 ± 2.31B

2.98 ± 1.58A

3.40 ± 1.97A

3.50 ± 1.88A

 < .001β

Lay persons

6.70 ± 1.78AB

7.28 ± 1.99B

7.62 ± 1.92B

5.78 ± 2.76B

4.18 ± 2.50B

3.16 ± 1.78A

3.32 ± 1.67A

3.60 ± 1.96A

 < .001β

p value

.029α

.006α

 < .001α

.001α

 < .001α

.309α

.961α

.475α

 

Total average

6.44 ± 1.74

6.71 ± 2.03

6.97 ± 1.96

4.94 ± 2.47

3.40 ± 2.15

3.28 ± 1.65

3.34 ± 1.66

3.39 ± 1.81

 
  1. In intergroup comparisons, different letters in the same column indicate statistically significant difference
  2. Intragroup comparisons: For Orthodontists: 0 > 4, 5, 6 ve 7; 1 > 3, 4, 5, 6 ve 7; 2 > 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; 3 > 4, 7; 4 < 5. Dentists: 0 > 3, 4, 5, 6 ve 7; 1 > 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; 2 > 3, 4, 5, 6 ve 7; 3 > 4 ve 6; 4 < 5, 6 ve 7. Orthodontic patients: 0 > 3, 4, 5, 6 ve 7; 1 > 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; 2 > 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; 3 > 4, 5, 6 ve 7. Lay persons: 0 > 4, 5, 6 ve 7; 1 > 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. 2 > 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; 3 > 4, 5, 6 ve 7
  3. P0, Resting; P1, Ideal smile; P2, − 2 mm low smile line; P3, + 4 mm gingival smile; P4, + 6 mm gingival smile; P5, Maxillary anterior crowding; P6, Median diastema; P7, Polydiastema
  4. αKruskal–Wallis test, p value < 0.05
  5. βFriedman test, p value < 0.017