Smile Attractiveness and Treatment Needs of Maxillary Midline Diastema with Various Widths: Perception among Laypersons, Dental Students, and Dentists in Malaysia

Table 4

Factors associated with aesthetic score of 0.5, 2.0, and 4.0 mm maxillary midline diastema (MMD) (multiple linear regression model).

Factor(s)	β (SE)	Odds ratio (95% Cl)	p-value
Aesthetic perception 0.5 mm MMD^a
Educational level	0.24 (0.06)	0.21 (0.13–0.35)
Gender	0.28 (0.09)	0.20 (0.10–0.50)
Ethnicity	−0.14 (0.06)	−0.12 (−0.26−0.32)
Constant	1.06 (0.28)
Aesthetic perception 2.0 mm MMD^b
Gender	0.20 (0.09)	0.11 (0.02–0.39)
Constant	1.22 (0.17)
Aesthetic perception 4.0 mm MMD^c
Age	−0.10 (0.05)	−0.10 (−0.20–0.01)
Constant	1.48 (0.81)

^aF = 11.705; df = 410; ; R² = 0.08; adjusted R² = 0.072. ^bF = 6.985; df = 412; ; R² = 0.011; adjusted R² = 0.009. ^cF = 1.516; df = 411; ; R² = 0.009; adjusted R² = 0.007. Significant difference of mean attractive score between groups, .