Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Orsini, M.G. et al.

Methods to evaluate profile preferences for the anteroposterior position of the mandible.

INTRODUCTION: Facial profile disharmonies in the anteroposterior (AP) position of the mandible are among the most frequent reasons that patients seek orthodontic treatment. Various methods are available for assessing profile preferences, and differences between them could affect treatment decisions. The purposes of this study were to compare and contrast 3 methods of evaluating profile preferences for the AP position of the mandible. METHODS: Facial profile preferences of white orthodontists (n = 28) and white (n = 56) and Japanese-American (n = 55) laypeople were evaluated. The esthetic significance of variations in the AP position of the mandible was investigated by using 3 methods: a traditional semantic differential scale, the Perceptometrics method (Health Programs Intl, Wellesley, Mass), and the implicit association test (IAT). RESULTS: Findings from the semantic differential scale show that, overall, there is a general preference among orthodontists and laypeople for an orthognathic profile (P <.001). Findings from the Perceptometrics method indicate that orthodontists consider the most pleasing profile to be more forward than do lay subjects (P <.001). The IAT results show a positive bias among all 3 groups toward orthognathic profiles and a negative bias toward profiles with mandibular retrognathism or prognathism. The IAT suggested that laypeople were more tolerant of mandibular prognathism in men than in women (P <.01), and more tolerant of mandibular retrognathia in white women than in men (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: These results support the benefits of using both implicit and explicit methods to assess facial profile preferences.[1]

References

Methods to evaluate profile preferences for the anteroposterior position of the mandible. Orsini, M.G., Huang, G.J., Kiyak, H.A., Ramsay, D.S., Bollen, A.M., Anderson, N.K., Giddon, D.B. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. (2006) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.