3.9 Article

Evaluation of the facial dimensions of young adult women with a preferred facial appearance

期刊

KOREAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS
卷 45, 期 5, 页码 253-260

出版社

KOREAN ASSOC ORTHODONTISTS
DOI: 10.4041/kjod.2015.45.5.253

关键词

Frontal soft tissue; Facial profile; Lips; Preferred facial appearance

资金

  1. Department of Dentistry, The Catholic University of Korea
  2. Graduate School of Clinical Dental Science, The Catholic University of Korea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the facial dimensions of young adult women with a preferred facial appearance and compare the results with those from the general population. Methods: Twenty-five linear, nine angular, and three area measurements were made and four ratios were calculated using a sample of standardized frontal and lateral photographs of 46 young adult women with a preferred facial appearance (Miss Korea group) and 44 young adult women from the general population (control group). Differences between the two groups were analyzed using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Results: Compared with the control group, the Miss Korea group exhibited a significantly greater facial height, total facial height (TFH; trichion menton), facial width (tragus right tragus left), facial depth (tragus true vertical line), and trichion-nasion/TFH ratio and smaller subnasale-menton/TFH and facial width/TFH ratios. Furthermore, the control group had smaller intercanthal and interpupillary widths. Conclusions: The Miss Korea group exhibited longer, wider, and deeper faces compared with those from the general population. Furthermore, the Miss Korea group had larger eyes, longer but less protruded noses, longer and more retruded lower lips and chins, larger lip vermilion areas, and smaller labiomental angles. These results suggest that the latest trends in facial esthetics should be considered during diagnosis and treatment planning for young women with dentofacial abnormalities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据