Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28208179›Full record

ArticleJAMA facial plastic surgery2017

A Quantitative Approach to Determining the Ideal Female Lip Aesthetic and Its Effect on Facial Attractiveness.

Natalie A Popenko, Prem B Tripathi, Zlatko Devcic, Koohyar Karimi, Kathryn Osann, Brian J F Wong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA facial plastic surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. [Autologous fat grafting for perioral and lower face rejuvenation].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. What is Beauty?Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2021
    Review
  17. Review
  18. A Safe and Effective Lip Augmentation Method: The Step-by-Step Φ (Phi) Technique.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Natalie A PopenkoDivision of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Beckman Laser Institute and Medical Clinic, University of California, Irvine2Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Irvine.
Prem B TripathiDivision of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Beckman Laser Institute and Medical Clinic, University of California, Irvine2Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Irvine.
Zlatko DevcicDivision of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Beckman Laser Institute and Medical Clinic, University of California, Irvine2Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Irvine.
Koohyar KarimiDivision of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Beckman Laser Institute and Medical Clinic, University of California, Irvine2Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Irvine.
Kathryn OsannDivision of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Beckman Laser Institute and Medical Clinic, University of California, Irvine2Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Irvine.
Brian J F WongDivision of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Beckman Laser Institute and Medical Clinic, University of California, Irvine2Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Irvine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceAesthetic proportions of the lips and their effect on facial attractiveness are poorly defined. Established guidelines would aid practitioners in achieving optimal aesthetic outcomes during cosmetic augmentation.

objectiveTo assess the most attractive lip dimensions of white women based on attractiveness ranking of surface area, ratio of upper to lower lip, and dimensions of the lip surface area relative to the lower third of the face. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsIn phase 1 of this study, synthetic morph frontal digital images of the faces of 20 white women ages 18 to 25 years old were used to generate 5 varied lip surface areas for each face. These 100 faces were cardinally ranked by attractiveness through our developed conventional and internet-based focus groups by 150 participants. A summed ranking score of each face was plotted to quantify the most attractive surface area. In phase 2 of the study, 4 variants for each face were created with 15 of the most attractive images manipulating upper to lower lip ratios while maintaining the most attractive surface area from phase 1. A total of 60 faces were created, and each ratio was ranked by attractiveness by 428 participants (internet-based focus groups). In phase 3, the surface area from the most attractive faces was used to determine the total lip surface area relative to the lower facial third. Data were collected from March 1 to November 31, 2010, and analyzed from June 1 to October 31, 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Most attractive lip surface area, ratio of upper to lower lip, and dimension of the lips relative to the lower facial third.

resultsIn phase 1, all 100 faces were cardinally ranked by 150 individuals (internet-based focus groups [n = 130] and raters from conventional focus groups [conventional raters] [n = 20]). In phase 2, all 60 faces were cardinally ranked by 428 participants (internet-based focus groups [n = 408] and conventional raters [n = 20]). The surface area that corresponded to the range of 2.0 to 2.5 × 104 pixels represented the highest summed rank, generating a pool of 14 images. This surface area was determined to be the most attractive and corresponded to a 53.5% increase in surface area from the original image. With the highest mean and highest proportions of most attractive rankings, the 1:2 ratio was deemed most attractive. Conversely, the ratio of 2:1 was deemed least attractive, having the lowest mean at 1.61 and the highest proportion of ranks within 1 with 310 votes (72.3%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Using a robust sample size, this study found that the most attractive lip surface area represents a 53.5% increase from baseline, an upper to lower lip ratio of 1:2, and a surface area equal to 9.6% of the lower third of the face. Lip dimensions and ratios derived in this study may provide guidelines in improving overall facial aesthetics and have clinical relevance to the field of facial plastic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.

Indexed as

BeautyEstheticsFacial RecognitionAdolescentCephalometryChoice BehaviorFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInternetLipPatient SatisfactionSurgery, PlasticYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28208179
PMCPMC5543334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.