ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2024
Truth Lies in the Depths: Novel Insights into Facial Aesthetic Measurements from a U.S. Survey Panel.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk Factors and Complication Rates of Inpatient Genioplasty Procedures in the U.S. Healthcare System: A 22-Year Retrospective Multi-center Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- AI-Based Quantitative and Objective Analysis of Aesthetic Results in Genioplasty.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAesthetic facial bone surgery and facial implantology expand the boundaries of conventional facial surgery that focus on facial soft tissue. This study aimed to reveal novel aesthetic facial measurements to provide tailored treatment concepts and advance patient care.
methodsA total of n=101 study participants (46 females and 55 males) were presented with 120 patient portraits (frontal images in natural head posture; 60 females and 60 males) and asked to assess the facial attractiveness (scale 0-10; "How attractive do you find the person in the image?") and the model capability score (MCS; scale 0-10; "How likely do you think the person in the image could pursue a modelling career?"). For each frontal photograph, defined facial measurements and ratios were taken to analyse their relationship with the perception of facial attractiveness and MCS.
resultsThe overall attractiveness rating was 4.3 ± 1.1, while the mean MCS was 3.4 ± 1.1. In young males, there was a significant correlation between attractiveness and the zygoma-mandible angle (ZMA)2 (r= - 0.553; p= 0.011). In young and middle-aged females, MCS was significantly correlated with facial width (FW)1-FW2 ratio (r= 0.475; p= 0.034). For all male individuals, a ZMA1 value of 171.79 degrees (Y= 0.313; p= 0.024) was the most robust cut-off to determine facial attractiveness. The majority of human evaluators (n=62; 51.7%) considered facial implants a potential treatment to improve the patient's facial attractiveness.
conclusionThis study introduced novel metrics of facial attractiveness, focusing on the facial skeleton. Our findings emphasized the significance of zygomatic measurements and mandibular projections for facial aesthetics, with FI representing a promising surgical approach to optimize facial aesthetics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
38772944What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.