Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 18, 2026
07:12
Protocol for Data Collection and Analysis Applied to Automated Facial Expression Analysis Technology and Temporal Analysis for Sensory Evaluation
Published on: August 26, 2016
Comparative study of smile analysis by subjective and computerized methods.
Roberta Tarkany Basting1, Rita de Cássia Silva da Trindade, Flávia Martão Flório
1Department of Restorative Dentistry, São Leopoldo Mandic Research Center, Campinas-SP, Brazil. rbasting@yahoo.com
Operative Dentistry
|December 13, 2006
Summary
Specialist dentists and general dentists significantly differed in their subjective smile analyses. Computerized analysis closely matched specialist subjective assessments, except for midline evaluation, highlighting differences in aesthetic perception.
Area of Science:
- Dental Aesthetics
- Facial Analysis
- Digital Dentistry
Background:
- Assessing smile aesthetics is crucial in restorative and cosmetic dentistry.
- Subjective evaluations by dental professionals can vary based on training and experience.
- Objective, quantifiable methods are increasingly explored to complement subjective assessments.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare subjective smile analyses between specialists and general dentists.
- To evaluate subjective smile analysis of the smile alone versus the smile in conjunction with the entire face.
- To compare subjective analysis with computerized measurements of smile aesthetics by specialists.
Main Methods:
- 100 adults with natural dentition provided 200 photographs (smile and full face).
- Subjective analyses were conducted by 3 general dentists and 3 specialists.
- Computerized analysis using AutoCAD software assessed midline, labial line, smile line, commissure line, and golden proportion.
Main Results:
- Significant differences (p=0.0000) were found in subjective analyses between specialists and general dentists for both smile and full-face views.
- Computerized analysis showed statistical differences compared to specialists' subjective analysis for all factors except the midline (p=0.1951).
- No single factor was found to be more relevant than others for establishing smile harmony.
Conclusions:
- Dental specialists and general dentists exhibit significant differences in subjective smile esthetic evaluations.
- Computer-aided smile analysis can closely align with specialist subjective assessments, offering a potentially objective tool.
- Further research is needed to determine the relative importance of various aesthetic parameters in achieving smile harmony.
