Line drawings of facial profiles and color photographs of dentitions were evaluated subjectively by 1,150 parents, 72 general practictioners of dentistry, and 54 orthodontists with regard to the normality and abnormality in dentofacial morphology and the need for orthodontic treatment. A significant difference was found between the evaluations of the parents and the professional groups in ten of the 11 facial profiles and in seven of the 11 photographs of dentitions. In general, the parents considered more of the examples acceptable and not requiring orthodontic treatment than did the professional groups. The dentists and orthodontists deviated significantly in their ratings onjy in their judgement of "ugly duckling" example (picture 22, higher abnormal rating by the dentists) and the profile example 10 (higher abnormal rating by orthodontists). number of orthondontists may have associated the conditions in picture 10 with a Class II, Division 2 malocclusion and, as such, scored it abnormal.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. M. Hamdan, I. K. Al-Omari, and Z. B. Al-Bitar Ranking dental aesthetics and thresholds of treatment need: a comparison between patients, parents, and dentists Eur J Orthod, August 1, 2007; 29(4): 366 - 371. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Josefsson, K. Bjerklin, and R. Lindsten Malocclusion frequency in Swedish and immigrant adolescents--influence of origin on orthodontic treatment need Eur J Orthod, February 1, 2007; 29(1): 79 - 87. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Bernabe and C. Flores-Mir Estimating arch length discrepancy through Little's Irregularity Index for epidemiological use Eur J Orthod, June 1, 2006; 28(3): 269 - 273. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]