# Visual self-assessment of dental appearance: A comparison of mirror types and digital reflection via smartphone front facing camera

## TL;DR

This study compares how different mirrors and smartphone cameras affect how people rate their own dental appearance.

## Contribution

The study reveals that magnified and tooth-shaped mirrors lead to lower self-assessment ratings compared to standard mirrors and smartphone reflections.

## Key findings

- Standard mirrors and smartphone reflections produced similar and generally favorable self-assessment ratings.
- Magnified and tooth-shaped mirrors were rated significantly lower than other devices.
- Intra-rater reliability was poor for most devices, indicating inconsistent self-assessments.

## Abstract

In dental practice, patients often evaluate their own dental attractiveness using mirrors or smartphone digital reflections. This study aimed to investigate how mirror size, shape, magnification and smartphone-based digital reflection influence self-perceived dental attractiveness.

This was a prospective cross-sectional study. Eighty-three participants assessed their dental attractiveness using a randomised sequence of reflective devices, including mirrors of different sizes (full-length, medium, small, standard pocket), a magnified pocket mirror, a tooth-shaped mirror, and a smartphone front-facing camera. Ratings were recorded on a 10-point visual analogue scale. Data were analysed using repeated-measures ANOVA with Bonferroni-adjusted post hoc comparisons. Intra-rater reliability was evaluated in a subset of participants using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Repeated-measures ANOVA indicated a significant overall effect of device type on dental attractiveness (F(4.62, 378.83) = 15.57, p < 0.001). Post hoc analyses showed no significant differences among full-length, medium, small, and standard pocket mirrors, or between these mirrors and the smartphone reflection (all p > 0.05). The magnified pocket mirror and tooth-shaped mirror were rated significantly lower than other devices (p < 0.001). Intra-rater reliability was generally poor (ICC < 0.35), with only the medium-size and tooth-shaped mirrors showing moderate agreement (ICC = 0.59 and 0.63, respectively).

Reflective device type influences self-perceived dental attractiveness. Standard mirrors of different sizes and smartphone reflections produced similar and generally favourable ratings. In contrast, magnified and tooth-shaped mirrors yielded lower ratings. Poor intra-rater reliability suggests that self-assessment based on reflection alone is inconsistent.