Have a personal or library account? Click to login

Orthodontic Treatment Need and the Dental Aesthetic Index

Open Access
|Jan 2024

References

  1. Jenny J, Cons NC, Kohout FJ et al. Test of a method to determine social acceptable occlusal conditions. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1980; 8: 424-33.
  2. Jenny J, Cons NC, Kohout FJ. Comparison of SASOC, a measure of dental aesthetics, with three orthodontic indices and orthodontist judgement. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1983; 11: 236-41.
  3. Evans R, Shaw W. Preliminary evaluation of an illustrated scale for rating dental attractiveness. Eur J Orthod 1987; 9: 314-8.
  4. Kenealy P, Shaw W. The effects of social class on uptake of orthodontic treatment. Br J Orthod 1989; 16: 107-11.
  5. Shaw WC, Addy M, Ray C. Dental and social effects of malocclusion and effectiveness of orthodontic treatment: A Review. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1980; 8: 36-45.
  6. Cons NC, Jenny J, Kohout FJ. DAI: the dental aesthetic index. Iowa City: NC Cons and J. Jenny, 1986.
  7. Cons NC, Jenny, Kohout FJ, et al. Perceptions of occlusal conditions in Australia, the German Democratic Republic and the United States of America. Int Dent J 1983; 33: 200-6.
  8. Tullock JFC, Shaw WC, UnderhillG, et al. A comparison of attitudes towards orthodontic treatment in British and American communities. Am J Orthod 1984; 85: 253-259.
  9. Cons NC, Jenny J, Kahout FJ et al. Utility of the DAI in industrialized and developing countries. J Public Health Dent 1989; 49: 163-6.
  10. Shaw WC, Lewis HG, Robinson NRE. Perceptions of malocclusion. Br Dent J 1975; 138: 211-216.
  11. Shaw WC. The influence of children’s dentofacial appearance on social attractiveness as judged by peers and lay adults. Am J Orthod 1981; 79: 399-415.
  12. Helm S, Petersen PE, Kreiborg S et al. Effect of separate malocclusion traits on concern for dental appearance. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1986; 14: 217-20.
  13. Linn EL. Social meanings of dental appearance. J Health Human Behav 1966; 7: 289-95.
  14. Banack AR, Cleall JF, Yip AS. Epidemiology of malocclusion in 12-year-old Winnipeg school children. J Canad Dent Assoc 1972; 12: 437-55.
  15. Helm S, Kreiborg S, Solow B. Psychosocial implications of malocclusion: A 15-year follow-up study in 30-year-old Danes. Am J Orthod 1985; 87: 110-18.
  16. Jenny J, Proshek JM. Visibility and prestige of occupations and the importance of dental appearance. J Canad Dent Assn 1986; 12: 987-9.
  17. Jenny J, Cons NC. Guidelines to uising the DAI. A supplement to the DAI: The Dental Aesthetic Index. Iowa City: NC Cons, J Jenny, 1988.
  18. Espeland LV, Stenvik A. Orthodontically treated young adults: Awareness of their own dental Arrangement. Europ J Orthod. 1991; 13: 7-14.
  19. Freer TJ, Olive R. A survey of malocclusion and treatment needs. Aust Orthod J 1976; 4: 128-36.
  20. Richmond S, Shaw WC, O’Brien KD, et al.. The development of the PAR index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity. Europ J Orthod 1992; 14: 125-39.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-1993-0018 | Journal eISSN: 2207-7480 | Journal ISSN: 2207-7472
Language: English
Page range: 4 - 7
Published on: Jan 18, 2024
Published by: Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 times per year

© 2024 Peter A. Keay, Terrence J. Freer, Kaye E. Basford, published by Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.