Search

This study continues our assessment of agreement and disagreement among 25 Chinese and 20 US orthodontists in the ranking for facial attractiveness of end-of-treatment photographs of randomly sampled growing Chinese and white orthodontic patients. The main aims of this article were to (1) measure the overall pattern of agreement between the mean rankings of US and Chinese orthodontists, and (2) measure the strength of agreement between the rankings of the US and Chinese orthodontists for each patient.Each judge independently ranked standard clinical sets of profile, frontal, and frontal-smiling photographs of 43 US patients and 48 Chinese patients. For each patient, a separate mean rank was computed from the responses of each group of judges. Pearson correlations between the mean ranks of the 2 groups of judges were used to measure their overall agreement. Paired and unpaired t tests were used to measure the agreement between the judges of the 2 groups for each patient.The overall agreement between the mean rankings of the US and Chinese judges was very high. For the US patients, the correlation between the Chinese and US judges means was r = 0.92, P0.0001. For the Chinese patients, the analogous value was r = 0.86, P0.0001. Agreement between the 2 groups of judges concerning each patient was also generally strong. For two thirds of the patients, the mean ranks of the US and Chinese judges differed by less than 1 unit in a scale of 12. However, for 6 patients considered individually (5 Chinese and 1 US), the assessment of the 2 groups of judges was statistically significantly different at P values ranging from 0.02 to less than 0.0001, even after the Bonferroni correction.These findings demonstrate that orthodontic clinicians can reliably identify and rank subtle differences between patients, and that differences between judges and between patients can be distinguished at a high level of statistical significance, given appropriate study designs. However, the reasons clinicians give for the differences in their judgments are more difficult to investigate and will require further study.

Orthodontists typically make judgments of facial attractiveness by examining groupings of profile, full-face, and smiling photographs considered together as a "triplet." The primary objective of this study was to determine the relative contributions of the 3 photographs-each considered separately-to the overall judgment a clinician forms by examining the combination of the 3.End-of-treatment triplet orthodontic photographs of 45 randomly selected orthodontic patients were duplicated. Copies of the profile, full-face, and smiling images were generated, and the images were separated and then pooled by image type for all subjects. Ten judges ranked the 45 photographs of each image type for facial attractiveness in groups of 9 to 12, from "most attractive" to "least attractive." Each judge also ranked the triplet groupings for the same 45 subjects. The mean attractiveness rankings for each type of photograph were then correlated with the mean rankings of each other and the triplets.The rankings of the 3 image types correlated highly with each other and the rankings of the triplets (P.0001). The rankings of the smiling photographs were most predictive of the rankings of the triplets (r = 0.93); those of the profile photographs were the least predictive (r = 0.76). The difference between these correlations was highly statistically significant (P = .0003). It was also possible to test the extent to which the judges' rankings were influenced by sex, original Angle classification, and extraction status of each patient. No statistically significant preferences were found for sex or Angle classification, and only 1 marginally significant preference was found for extraction pattern.Clinician judges demonstrated a high level of agreement in ranking the facial attractiveness of profile, full-face, and smiling photographs of a group of orthodontically treated patients whose actual differences in physical dimensions were relatively small. The judges' rankings of the smiling photographs were significantly better predictors of their rankings of the triplet of each patient than were their rankings of the profile photographs.