Comparison between the opinions of Tanzanian parents and their children on dental attractiveness

Angle Orthodontist

Volumn 74, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 63-70

  Mugonzibwa, E A ^a   Kuijpers Jagtman, A M ^b   Van't Hof, M A ^b   Kikwilu, E N ^c  

^a MUHIMBILI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH AND ALLIED SCIENCES   (Tanzania)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c University of Nijmegen ^*

Author keywords

Dental attractiveness; IOTN index; Occlusion gender preference; Treatment need

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CHILD; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DENTAL CARE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; MALOCCLUSION; MOUTH HYGIENE; OCCLUSION; ORTHODONTICS; PHOTOGRAPHY; QUESTIONNAIRE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; AGE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CHILD PARENT RELATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIASTEMA; FEMALE; MALE; PARENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SEX DIFFERENCE; TANZANIA;

ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CHILD; DIASTEMA; ESTHETICS, DENTAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; OPEN BITE; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; PARENT-CHILD RELATIONS; PARENTS; PHOTOGRAPHY; QUESTIONNAIRES; SEX FACTORS; TANZANIA;

EID: 1842851858     PISSN: 00033219     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Farrow AL, Zarrinnia K, Azizi K. Bimaxillary protrusion in black Americans: an esthetic evaluation and the treatment considerations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993;104:240-250.
2. Polk MS, Farman AG, Yancey JA, Gholston LR, Johnson BE, Regennitter FJ. Soft tissue profile: a survey of African American preferences. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;108:90-101.
3. Mantizikos T. Esthetic soft tissue profile preferences among the Japanese population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;114:1-7.
4. Helm S, Petersen PE, Kreiborg S, Solow B. Effect of separate malocclusion traits on concern for dental appearance. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1986;14:217-220.
5. Kerosuo H, Hausen H, Laine T, Shaw WC. The influence of incisal malocclusion on the social attractiveness of young adults in Finland. Eur J Orthod. 1995;17:505-512.
6. Shaw WC, Meek SC, Jones DS. Nicknames, teasing, harassment and the salience of dental features among school children. Br J Orthod. 1980;7:75-80.
7. Shaw WC. Factors influencing the desire for orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod. 1981;3:151-162.
8. Shaw WC, Rees G, Dawe M, Charles CR. The influence of dentofacial appearance on the social attractiveness of young adults. Am J Orthod. 1985;87:21-26.
9. Phillips C, Hill BJ, Cannac C. The influence of video imaging on patients' perceptions and expectations. Angle Orthod. 1995;65:263-270.
10. Burden DJ. The influence of social class, gender and peers on the uptake of orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod. 1995;17:199-203.
11. Tulloch JFC, Shaw WC, Smith A. A comparison of attitudes towards orthodontic treatment in British and American communities. Am J Orthod. 1984;85:253-259.
12. Gosney MB. An investigation into some of the factors influencing the desire for orthodontic treatment. Br J Orthod. 1986;13:87-94.
13. Ahmed B, Gilthope MS, Bedi R. Agreement between normative and perceived orthodontic need amongst deprived multiethnic school children in London. Clin Orthod Res. 2001;4:65-71.
14. Evans R, Shaw WC. Preliminary evaluation of an illustrated scale for rating dental attractiveness. Eur J Orthod. 1987;9:314-318.
15. Mugonzibwa EA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, van't Hof MA, Kikwilu EN. Opinion on dental attractiveness and perception of orthodontic treatment need amongst Tanzanian children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. In press.
16. SPSS Inc. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Chicago (IL): SPSS, 1990.
17. Soh G, Lew K. Assessment of orthodontic treatment needs by teenagers in an Asian community in Singapore. Community Dent Health. 1992;9:57-62.
18. Peck H, Peck S. A concept of facial esthetics. Angle Orthod. 1970;40:284-318.
19. Sergl HG, Stodt W. Experimental investigation of the aesthetic effect of various tooth positions after loss of an incisor tooth. Trans Eur Orthod. Soc. 1970;497-507.
20. Shaw WC, Lewis HG, Robertson NRE. Perception of malocclusion. Br Dent J. 1975;138:211-216.
21. Prahl-Andersen B, Boersma H, Van der Linden FPGM, Moore AW. Perceptions of dentofacial morphology by laypersons, general dentists, and orthodontists. J Am Dent Assoc. 1979;98:209-212.
22. Espeland LV, Stenvik A. Orthodontically treated young adults: awareness of their own dental arrangement. Eur J Orthod. 1991;13:7-14.
23. Mugonzibwa EA, Mumghamba E, Rugarabamu P, Kimaro S. Occlusal and space characteristics among 12 year old schoolchildren in Bukoba and Moshi, Tanzania. Afr Dent J. 1990;4:6-10.
24. Mugonzibwa EA. Variation in occlusal and space characteristics in a series of 6- to 18-year-olds, in Ilala district, Tanzania. Afr Dent J. 1992;6:17-22.
25. Mugonzibwa EA. Occlusion survey in a group of Tanzanian adults. Afr Dent J. 1993;7:6-10.
26. Mugonzibwa EA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Eskeli R, Laine-Alava MT, van't Hof MA. Spacing and crowding among African and Caucasian children. Community Dent Oral Health. In press.
27. Ford CS, Prothro ET, Child IL. Some trans-cultural comparisons of esthetic judgement. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1966;68:19-26.
28. Child IL, Iwao S. Personality and esthetic sensitivity: extension of findings to younger ages and to different cultures. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1968;8:308-312.
29. Cons NC, Jenny J, Kohout FJ, Freer TJ, Eismann D. Perceptions of occlusal conditions in Australia, the German Democratic Republic and the United States of America. Int Dent J. 1983;33:200-206.
30. De Smit A, Dermaut L. Soft tissue profile preference. Am J Orthod. 1984;86:67-73.
31. Cons NC, Jenny J. Comparing perceptions of dental esthetics in the USA with eleven ethnic groups. Int Dent J. 1994;44:489-494.