ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2025
Evaluation of Facial Proportions, Landmarks Relationships With Facial and Dental Midlines, and Smile Framework.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFacial features play a key role in determining human attractiveness. Facial beauty is characterized by harmonious proportions and symmetry, essential for successful aesthetic treatments in oral rehabilitation. This study examines relationships between oral and facial midlines and key anatomical landmarks, as well as evaluates the smile framework and dental/facial proportions. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 637 males and females with an average age of 22.13 years (ranging from 18 to 40) were examined. Each individual had three digital images taken: a full-face photo at rest, a forced smile photo, and an intraoral photo. For each patient, three levels of aesthetic analysis, from macro to micro aesthetics, were conducted. Initially, transverse and vertical facial proportions and their relationships with the golden ratio were assessed. Next, the relationships between predetermined important facial landmarks and the oral and facial midlines were evaluated, and finally, the patient's smile framework was analyzed. Data analysis was performed via IBM SPSS Statistics (v24.0) and appropriate statistical tests.
resultsThe studied population had a consonant smile arc, upward upper lip curvature, medium smile line with exposure up to the first molar, and square-shaped teeth. Order of landmarks relative to facial midline from left to right includes the following: nasion, nose tip, philtrum, mouth midline, and dental midline. Furthermore, five out of seven vertical facial proportions and all transverse facial proportions closely align with the divine ratio (1.618), with significant gender-specific differences.
conclusionIntegration of these aesthetic standards are necessary to ensure satisfactory and predictable outcomes in treatments and can be used at macroesthetic, miniesthetic, and microesthetic levels by maxillofacial surgeons, prosthodontists, orthodontists, and restorative specialists. According to impact of race, sex, and age on these factors, conducting similar studies in different populations is recommended to achieve more precise and aesthetically pleasing treatments tailored to each community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.