100 Chapter 5 Anthropometric measurements Anthropometric measurements of the head and face were performed as described previously, using the same anthropometric landmarks (Table 1) [3]. The distance between anthropometric landmarks was determined twice using an anatomical sliding caliper with electronic display showing distance in millimeters (mm). The two measurements were carried out by one researcher (ZA) on the same day. Statistical analysis The data were processed in an electronic clinical data-management platform (CastorEdc, Castor, Amsterdam, the Netherlands) and then converted into SPSS, version 27.0 (IBM Corp SPSS Statistics, Armonk, NY, USA) for the statistical analysis. The Shapiro–Wilk test was used to assess the normality of the data. The data were presented as medians and their interquartile range (IQR), as most of the parameters were not normally distributed. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to determine the degree of agreement between two palatal surface area measurements and between the two anthropometric measurements of the head and face. A twoway mixed, absolute agreement, average-measures ICC was calculated for these measurements [13, 19]. The ICC is indicative of poor (values less than 0.5), moderate (between 0.5 and 0.75), good (between 0.75 and 0.9) and excellent (greater than 0.90) reliability [17]. The mean of the two palatal surface area measurements and the various anthropometric measurements of the head and face was used for further analysis. Female-male differences for the palatal surface area measurement and the anthropometric measurements of head and face were explored with the Mann-Whitney U test. The possible relations between the palatal surface area and anthropometric measurements were analyzed with a bootstrapped Spearman rank correlation test (1000 × bootstrapping). The Spearman’s rho coefficient and bias-corrected accelerated (Bca) 95% confidence interval were extracted. Furthermore, the participants were stratified based on their sex. The size of the correlation coefficient was interpreted as poor (r = 0.1–0.2), fair (r = 0.3–0.5), moderate (r = 0.6–0.7) or very strong (r = 0.8–0.9) correlation [1]. All significance levels (P) were set at 0.05.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw