2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2011.02253.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validated Assessment Scale for Neck Volume

Abstract: The neck volume scale demonstrates optimal reliability for clinical research and practice.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
55
0
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
55
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…[32][33][34][35] Only two-dimensional photographs were used for these scales and the validation booklets. From each subject, the following portraits were taken: whole frontal face at rest (for all facial scales and neck volume scale), whole frontal face with hyperkinetic forehead lines (for forehead lines scale), whole frontal face with glabellar frown lines at maximum frown and mouth while pursing (for glabellar scale and upper and lower lip wrinkle scale), whole lateral face at a 45º oblique view with smiling expression (for crow's feet scale), whole lateral face at a 45º oblique view at rest (for crow's feet scale), and whole lateral face at a 90º view at rest (for neck volume and jawline lateral view scales).…”
Section: Photographic Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[32][33][34][35] Only two-dimensional photographs were used for these scales and the validation booklets. From each subject, the following portraits were taken: whole frontal face at rest (for all facial scales and neck volume scale), whole frontal face with hyperkinetic forehead lines (for forehead lines scale), whole frontal face with glabellar frown lines at maximum frown and mouth while pursing (for glabellar scale and upper and lower lip wrinkle scale), whole lateral face at a 45º oblique view with smiling expression (for crow's feet scale), whole lateral face at a 45º oblique view at rest (for crow's feet scale), and whole lateral face at a 90º view at rest (for neck volume and jawline lateral view scales).…”
Section: Photographic Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2,4,5,7,8,[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] The increase in treatment options parallels the efforts to measure the treatment effects using clinical means in the form of scales. [32][33][34][35] Using an inductive methodology approach, the ratings from the single scales were combined to create sum scores of aesthetic units (upper, mid, and lower face) and to calculate a total face score out of all ratings. 3,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] Here, we report on the global evaluation of the entire face based on 20 image-simulated photonumerical visual scales developed for rating important facial anatomical areas that are commonly subject to aesthetic interventions.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other systems have been designed as scales to measure the aging face and the response to non-invasive cosmetic procedures such as filler injections and neuromodulators. Five-point photo numeric scales to assess brow position [3,4], forehead wrinkles [3,4], melolabial folds [3,5], marionette lines [3,5], jowls [5], and neck [6] have been developed and validated. Although not necessarily designed for preoperative surgical evaluation, these validated scales assess many of the same components as the McCollough Facial Rejuvenation System.…”
Section: +mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, recently published photographic scales allow an investigator to compare a subject's anatomic features against an ordinal array of standard photographs to determine which is most closely representative [14][15][16][17][18]. The number or word associated with this best-fit photograph is recorded.…”
Section: Dearth Of Standardized and Validated Outcome Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%