Computer-based evaluation of gender identification and morphologic classification of tooth face and arch forms

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Volumn 88, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 578-584

  Berksun, Semih ^a   Hasanreisoǧlu, Ufuk ^a   Gökdeniz, Burak ^a  

^a ANKARA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DENTIST; FACE; FEMALE; GENDER IDENTITY; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL PERSONNEL; MEDICAL PHOTOGRAPHY; MORPHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; TOOTH ARCH; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; CANINE TOOTH; CEPHALOMETRY; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DENTAL CARE; HISTOLOGY; IMAGE PROCESSING; INCISOR; OBSERVER VARIATION; ODONTOMETRY; PHOTOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; STATISTICS; TOOTH;

CEPHALOMETRY; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CUSPID; DATABASES; DENTAL ARCH; ESTHETICS, DENTAL; FACE; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; INCISOR; MALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; ODONTOMETRY; PHOTOGRAPHY; PHOTOGRAPHY, DENTAL; PROSTHODONTICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; STATISTICS; TOOTH;

EID: 0036885783     PISSN: 00223913     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2002.129381     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Brodbelt RH, Walker GF, Nelson D, Seluk LW. Comparison of face shape with tooth form. J Prosthet Dent 1984;52:588-92.
2. Zarb GA, Bolender CL, Carlsson GE. Boucher's prosthodontic treatment for edentulous patients. 11th ed. St. Louis: CV Mosby;1997. p.231, 326-28.
3. Seluk LW, Brodbelt RH, Walker GF. A biometric comparison of face shape with denture tooth form. J Oral Rehabil 1987;14:139-45.
4. Engelmeier RL. Complete-denture esthetics. Dent Clin North Am 1996;40:71-84.
5. Sellen PN, Jagger DC, Harrison A. Computer-generated study of the correlation between tooth, face, arch forms, and palatal contour. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:163-8.
6. Winkler S. Essentials of complete denture prosthodontics. 2nd ed. Massachusetts: PSG Publishing Comp; 1988. p. 205-7.
7. Baskar RM, Davenport JC, Tomlin HR, Prosthetic treatment of the edentulous patient. 3rd ed. Hampshire: Macmillan Press Ltd.;1992. p. 183.
8. Leschot M, Stocker MW. Fundamental principles in the design of anterior teeth esthetics in complete denture prosthetics. In: Schärer P, Rinn LA, Kopp FR. Esthetic guidelines for restorative dentistry. Berlin: Quintessence Publishing; 1982. p. 221-2.
9. Hayakawa I. Principles and practices of complete dentures. Osaka: Quintessence Publishing; 1999. p. 71.
10. Rufenacht CR. Principles of esthetic integration. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing; 2000. p. 144-5.
11. Rufenacht CR. Fundamentals of esthetics. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co. Inc.; 1992. p. 99, 108-9.
12. Dunn WJ, Murchison DF, Broome JC. Esthetics: patients' perceptions of dental attractiveness. J Prosthodont 1996;5:166-71.
13. Sherfudhin H, Abdullah MA, Khan N. A cross-sectional study of canine dimorphism in establishing sex identity: comparison of two statistical methods. J Oral Rehabil 1996;23:627-31.
14. Hyde TP, McCord F, Macfarlane T, Smith J. Gender esthetics in the natural dentition. Eur J Prosthodont Rest Dent 1999;7:27-30.
15. McCord JF, Burke T, Roberts C, Deakin M. Perceptions of denture aesthetics: a two-centre study of denture wearers and denture providers. Aust Dent J 1994;39:365-7.
16. Kokich VO Jr, Kiyak HA, Shapiro PA. Comparing the perception of dentists and lay people to altered dental esthetics. J Esthet Dent 1999;11:311-24.
17. Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1981. p. 212-25.