Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39103640›Full record

ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2024

There Is no Universal Standard of Beauty.

Robert Singer, Tim Papadopoulos

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Robert SingerClinical Professor of Plastic Surgery (Voluntary), The University of California, San Diego (UCSD), San Diego, CA, USA.
Tim PapadopoulosAdjunct Clinical Associate Professor of Plastic Surgery, University of Notre Dame, Sydney, Australia. drtim@drtim.com.au.ORCID 0000-0003-2899-3924

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article discusses the various factors that contribute to facial beauty and the different contexts in which they are significant. The authors examine the roles of the golden ratio, ideal proportions, symmetry, and specific facial features in what constitutes an attractive face. They also investigate the influence of cultural and evolutionary perspectives on facial beauty and the impact of social media on our perception of beauty. The article provides a comprehensive overview of the topic and emphasises the significance of facial beauty and its impact on our lives. The authors acknowledge that the concept of beauty is difficult to define with absolute precision, and that the objective-subjective argument regarding facial beauty remains unsolved. However, they argue that physical attributes undoubtedly influence perceptions of attractiveness, but beauty extends beyond surface-level features. They also suggest that embracing diversity in beauty standards fosters a more inclusive society that celebrates the unique qualities of every person.Level of Evidence V 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

BeautyFaceEstheticsFemaleHumansMaleAttractivenessFacial aestheticsFacial beautyFacial symmetryGolden ratioProportionRatio

Identifiers

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.