Skip to main content
. 2021 May 7;21:242. doi: 10.1186/s12903-021-01605-0

Table 6.

The correlation between measurements of morphology factor 1 and 5 and measurements of EMGA factor 1

TA2 MM2 DA2 ME1 ME3 ME4 UO3 UO4
ANS-Me 0.469** 0.507** 0.332* 0.487** 0.494** 0.561** 0.396* 0.455**
N-Me − 0.308 0.359* − 0.228 0.332* 0.445** 0.269 0.306 0.245
FMA 0.660** 0.536** 0.347* 0.248 0.284 0.430** 0.294 0.405*
GoGn-SN 0.586** 0.444** 0.365* 0.208 0.262 0.414* 0.271 0.420*
U1-PP − 0.077 − 0.135 0.018 0.052 0.166 0.336* 0.027 0.201
U6-PP − 0.212 − 0.292 − 0.126 0.374* 0.299 0.386* 0.099 0.348*
L1-MP − 0.259 − 0.287 − 0.235 0.488** 0.357* 0.376* 0.368* 0.164
L6-MP − 0.104 − 0.203 − 0.153 0.397* 0.291 0.299 0.263 0.174
Overbite 0.723** 0.762** 0.543** 0.613** 0.531** 0.607** 0.453** 0.657**
Mx1-SN 0.333* 0.393* 0.494* 0.549** 0.343* 0.303* 0.167 0.280
Angle of Axis of Upper and Lower Central Incisor 0.494** 0.475** 0.334* 0.377* 0.326* 0.478** − 0.189 − 0.286

Pearson correlation analysis was used for normal distribution data, spearman correlation analysis was for skew distribution data, r > 0.3. Measurements with strong correlation were extracted and displayed in a bold font

TA, temporal muscle; MM, masseter muscle; DA, anterior digastric; UO, upper orbicularis; ME, mentalis muscle

*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01