Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

A sample series of images from the album used for the study.

The modified feature is the width of the buccal corridor. A: the unmodified image. B-E: the buccal corridor widens by 1 mm steps up to + 4 mm (compared to the unmodified image).

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Photo rating: The modified mini- and microesthetic features.

See also supplementary material.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

The number of students and distribution of genders by grade.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Results of the Likert-type items.

The respondents had to indicate how much they agreed with the given statements on a 1 to 5 scale where 1 meant not at all and 5 meant absolutely.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Distribution of preferences in the five grades for midline shift.

The vertical line between the central incisors was shifted to the left and to the right in 1 mm steps (percentages, N = 861).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Distribution of preferences in the five grades for the relative visibility of the arches.

The arches were moved upward and downward behind the lips in 0.5 mm steps (percentages, N = 861).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 4.

The most and the least preferred variations by grade for the photo series where no significant association with grade was found (N = 861).

The conventions are the same as in Table 1.

More »

Table 4 Expand