Ranking facial attractiveness

Knight, Helen; Keith, Olly

doi:10.1093/ejo/cji042

Cited by 71 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, in a study by Knight and Keith, 35 increased anterior LFH was found to be associated with less attractive faces for females, but no such trend existed for males. Ioi et al 34 also reported that nonexpert raters rated slightly shorter female profile silhouettes as the most favored.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Influence of lower facial height changes on frontal facial attractiveness and perception of treatment need by lay people

Varlık

Demirbaş

Orhan

2010

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To test the hypothesis that lower facial height has no influence on frontal facial attractiveness and treatment need perception of lay people. Materials and Methods: Frontal facial silhouettes of a man and a woman with normal lower facial height values (male: 81.5 mm; female: 70.5 mm) were modified by increasing and decreasing their lower facial heights in steps of 1 mm to obtain frontal images with different lower facial height alterations ranging from +6 mm to 26 mm for each sex. A panel of 100 lay people scored each silhouette's attractiveness on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) and also indicated whether they would seek treatment if the image represented their own. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare the VAS scores. Results: Unaltered 61-mm and 62-mm silhouettes got the highest VAS scores. Scores were significantly lower (P # .001) as the divergence from the normal value exceeded 2 mm. Beyond +3 mm and 24 mm in females and +4 mm and 23 mm in males the difference between the scores became statistically insignificant. At 64 mm, more than 75% of the raters elected to have treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Influence of lower facial height changes on frontal facial attractiveness and perception of treatment need by lay people

Varlık

Demirbaş

Orhan

2010

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Assessment of facial profile changes in patients treated with maxillary premolar extractions original article facial profile preferences for the anteroposterior position of the mandible showed that the preference of orthodontists also differed in relation to both lay groups (Caucasian and Japanese). Disagreements were also observed between orthodontist evaluators in studies of facial attractiveness, 10,11 showing that lay people were less careful in the assessment of this issue. The results of studies 2,3 on the effect of treatment with and without extraction showed that orthodontists demonstrated a more accurate perception of small changes in facial profile.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of facial profile changes in patients treated with maxillary premolar extractions

Almeida–Pedrin¹,

Guimarães²,

Almeida

et al. 2012

Dental Press J. Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Evaluate the facial profile changes of orthodontic treatment with extraction of two upper first premolars, from the perspective of orthodontists, dentists and lay people. Methods: Facial profiles of radiographs taken before and after treatment of 70 patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion were traced. The silhouettes of the 70 patients were randomly assembled in an album with, being two profiles on each sheet of the same patient. Then, 30 orthodontists, 30 dentists and 30 lay people chose the more esthetic facial profile (A or B), and the amount of change they perceived between the two profiles before and after treatment, according to a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: The results revealed that 83 examiners preferred the posttreatment profiles, and only three dentists and four lay people chose the profiles pre-treatment more frequently. Thus, the orthodontists often chose the profiles after treatment, followed by dentists, with no statistically significant differences found between dentists and lay people. There were significant differences within groups in the preference of pre-and post-treatment profile. Furthermore, the three groups of evaluators indicated that pre and post-treatment profiles did not differ substantially. Conclusions:The treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusion with extraction of two first premolars has a positive effect on facial profile esthetics. Objetivo: avaliar as alterações do perfil facial decorrentes do tratamento ortodôntico com extrações de dois primeiros pré--molares superiores, sob a óptica de ortodontistas, cirurgiões-dentistas e leigos. Métodos: foram traçados os perfis faciais das telerradiografias pré-e pós-tratamento de 70 pacientes com má oclusão de Classe II, divisão 1, e foi montado um álbum com as silhuetas dos 70 pacientes, de forma aleatória, sendo dois perfis em cada folha do mesmo paciente. A seguir, 30 ortodontistas, 30 cirurgiões-dentistas e 30 leigos escolheram o perfil facial mais estético (A ou B), e a quantidade de alteração que percebiam entre os dois perfis pré-e pós-tratamento, de acordo com a escala visual analógica (EVA). Resultados: os resultados revelaram que 83 examinadores preferiram o perfil pós-tratamento, sendo que somente três cirurgiões-dentistas e quatro leigos escolheram com maior frequência os perfis pré-tratamento. Assim, os ortodontistas escolheram mais frequentemente os perfis pós-tratamento, seguidos pelos cirurgiões-dentistas, sem diferença estatisticamente significativa entre cirurgiões-dentistas e leigos. Houve diferença estatisticamente significativa intragrupos na preferência do perfil pré-e pós-tratamento. Além disso, os três grupos de avaliadores indicaram que os perfis pré-e pós-tratamento não diferiram substancialmente. Conclusões: o tratamento da má oclusão de Classe II, divisão 1, com extração de dois primeiros pré-molares produziu um efeito positivo na estética do perfil facial.Palavras-chave: Extração dentária. Má oclusão Classe II de Angle. Ortodontia corretiva. Percepção.

show abstract

“…Moreover, cephalometric measurements that define facial profiles were found to be poorly correlated with the perception of facial esthetics. [21][22][23] The aims of this study were to evaluate the outcome of orthognathic surgery by objective cephalometric measurement of posttreatment soft-tissue profile and by subjective evaluation of profile esthetics by laypersons and clinicians. Another aim of this study was to investigate the effects of soft-tissue cephalometric variables on assessment of postsurgical profile esthetics by laypersons and professionals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcome of Orthognathic Surgery in Chinese Patients

Chew

Sandham

Soh

et al. 2007

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the outcome of orthognathic surgery by objective cephalometric measurement of posttreatment soft-tissue profile and by subjective evaluation of profile esthetics by laypersons and clinicians. Materials and Methods: The sample consisted of 30 Chinese patients who had completed combined orthodontic and orthognathic surgical treatment. The posttreatment cephalograms of these patients were analyzed with respect to profile convexity, facial height, and lip contours and these were compared to the previously established esthetic norms. Line drawings of the soft-tissue profile were displayed to a panel comprising six laypersons and six clinicians who scored the esthetics of each profile using a 7-point scale.Results: Complete normalization of cephalometric soft-tissue variables was not achieved with orthognathic surgery in most patients, with four of the six soft-tissue cephalometric measurements showing significant differences compared to the esthetic norms. There were good correlations in the esthetic scores between laypersons and clinicians, even though clinicians tend to rate the profiles more favorably. Facial convexity and facial height did not significantly influence the subjective scores of both the laypersons and clinicians. Lower lip protrusion was the only cephalometric variable that significantly influenced clinicians' assessment of profile esthetics (P Ͻ .01). Conclusions: Profile convexity and lower facial height proportion had little influence on both lay and professional perception of profile esthetics. Lower lip position is the only cephalometric variable that significantly influenced clinicians' assessment of profile esthetics.

show abstract

Ranking facial attractiveness

Cited by 71 publications

References 18 publications

Influence of lower facial height changes on frontal facial attractiveness and perception of treatment need by lay people

Influence of lower facial height changes on frontal facial attractiveness and perception of treatment need by lay people

Assessment of facial profile changes in patients treated with maxillary premolar extractions

Outcome of Orthognathic Surgery in Chinese Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About