Cargando…

Comparison of Digital and Paper Assessment of Smile Aesthetics Perception

OBJECTIVES: Despite the widespread of assessment of smile aesthetic perception in many areas, there has yet to be a direct comparison of digital and paper-based photographs for the assessment of smile aesthetics. Here we compared digital and paper-based photographs representing different smile aesth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Agou, Shoroog Hassan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7685279/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33282777
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_323_20
_version_ 1783613155587391488
author Agou, Shoroog Hassan
author_facet Agou, Shoroog Hassan
author_sort Agou, Shoroog Hassan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Despite the widespread of assessment of smile aesthetic perception in many areas, there has yet to be a direct comparison of digital and paper-based photographs for the assessment of smile aesthetics. Here we compared digital and paper-based photographs representing different smile aesthetic features using visual analog scale (VAS) scoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred students were randomly recruited from a university campus. Participants were asked to record their perception of smile aesthetics via paper and digital-based platforms. The minimum clinically important difference between platforms was set at 15 mm. The percentage of participants who rated smile attractiveness worse on digital images was recorded. The paired one-tailed Student’s t test was used to determine differences between digital and paper platforms, and Bland–Altman analysis and intraclass correlations (ICCs) were used to test for agreement between paper and digital photographs. RESULTS: Ninety-nine subjects participated, 55 men (mean age = 22.05, standard deviation [SD] = 1.91) and 44 women (mean age 22.05, SD = 1.84). There were statistically significant differences between paper-based and digital photographs for all images except one (paired t test; P < 0.05). Digital ratings were lower than paper-based ratings for all images, and differences were clinically significant in four out of eight images. A high percentage of participants (50.5%–85.9%) rated smile attractiveness worse on digital images than on paper for all images. There was poor agreement between the two methods as assessed by ICCs and Bland–Altman analysis. CONCLUSION: Equivalence between paper and digital images for smile aesthetics cannot be assumed, and paper-based photographs may lead to clinically relevant overestimations of perceived attractiveness. As academic dentistry increasingly relies on digital imaging and sharing in the post-COVID-19 world, further validation of digital platforms for smile aesthetics assessment is warranted, and care should be taken when interpreting the results of studies assessing smile perception based on different platforms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7685279
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76852792020-12-03 Comparison of Digital and Paper Assessment of Smile Aesthetics Perception Agou, Shoroog Hassan J Int Soc Prev Community Dent Original Article OBJECTIVES: Despite the widespread of assessment of smile aesthetic perception in many areas, there has yet to be a direct comparison of digital and paper-based photographs for the assessment of smile aesthetics. Here we compared digital and paper-based photographs representing different smile aesthetic features using visual analog scale (VAS) scoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred students were randomly recruited from a university campus. Participants were asked to record their perception of smile aesthetics via paper and digital-based platforms. The minimum clinically important difference between platforms was set at 15 mm. The percentage of participants who rated smile attractiveness worse on digital images was recorded. The paired one-tailed Student’s t test was used to determine differences between digital and paper platforms, and Bland–Altman analysis and intraclass correlations (ICCs) were used to test for agreement between paper and digital photographs. RESULTS: Ninety-nine subjects participated, 55 men (mean age = 22.05, standard deviation [SD] = 1.91) and 44 women (mean age 22.05, SD = 1.84). There were statistically significant differences between paper-based and digital photographs for all images except one (paired t test; P < 0.05). Digital ratings were lower than paper-based ratings for all images, and differences were clinically significant in four out of eight images. A high percentage of participants (50.5%–85.9%) rated smile attractiveness worse on digital images than on paper for all images. There was poor agreement between the two methods as assessed by ICCs and Bland–Altman analysis. CONCLUSION: Equivalence between paper and digital images for smile aesthetics cannot be assumed, and paper-based photographs may lead to clinically relevant overestimations of perceived attractiveness. As academic dentistry increasingly relies on digital imaging and sharing in the post-COVID-19 world, further validation of digital platforms for smile aesthetics assessment is warranted, and care should be taken when interpreting the results of studies assessing smile perception based on different platforms. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7685279/ /pubmed/33282777 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_323_20 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Agou, Shoroog Hassan
Comparison of Digital and Paper Assessment of Smile Aesthetics Perception
title Comparison of Digital and Paper Assessment of Smile Aesthetics Perception
title_full Comparison of Digital and Paper Assessment of Smile Aesthetics Perception
title_fullStr Comparison of Digital and Paper Assessment of Smile Aesthetics Perception
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Digital and Paper Assessment of Smile Aesthetics Perception
title_short Comparison of Digital and Paper Assessment of Smile Aesthetics Perception
title_sort comparison of digital and paper assessment of smile aesthetics perception
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7685279/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33282777
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_323_20
work_keys_str_mv AT agoushorooghassan comparisonofdigitalandpaperassessmentofsmileaestheticsperception