Shanghai kou qiang yi xue = Shanghai journal of stomatology · 2026
[Quadratic correlation analysis between cephalometric measurements and facial profile attractiveness].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Feng Xiaofan, Chen Xin, Ren Hongyu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To explore the nonlinear quadratic relationship between cephalometric measurements and facial attractiveness.
METHODS: Photographs were used by 16 laypersons to rate the attractiveness of 180 adult patients without orthodontic treatment.The quadratic correlation between 37 cephalometric measures(obtained from lateral cephalograms) and facial attractiveness was calculated, and the maximum attractiveness values(MAVs) for significant cephalometric measures were identified.
RESULTS: Nineteen measures demonstrated significant quadratic correlations with facial attractiveness, with r values from 0.203 to 0.529. The top 12 parameters that had a significant quadratic correlation with facial attractiveness were ANB angle (r = 0.529, MAV = 2.3°), NA-APo (0.505, 3.9°), G'-Sn-Pog' (0.467, 11.1°), UL-EP (0.440, -0.3 mm), Wits (0.415, 0.1 mm), facial angle (0.374, 89.1°), FMIA (0.374, 63.6°), Pog' to G Vert (0.374, 0.7 mm), N' Vert-Pog'(0.368, 4.2 mm), SNB(0.367, 79.2°), L1-NB (0.346, 5.3 mm) and L1-NB (0.340, 25.2°), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The protrusion of the upper lip and the anteroposterior position of the mandible may be the primary cephalometric parameters related to subjective facial profile perceptions. The position of the lower incisor contributed more to facial attractiveness than the upper incisor. It is noteworthy that the normal values for most cephalometric measurements differ significantly from the MAV, indicating that these normal values do not accurately reflect facial attractiveness.
METHODS: Photographs were used by 16 laypersons to rate the attractiveness of 180 adult patients without orthodontic treatment.The quadratic correlation between 37 cephalometric measures(obtained from lateral cephalograms) and facial attractiveness was calculated, and the maximum attractiveness values(MAVs) for significant cephalometric measures were identified.
RESULTS: Nineteen measures demonstrated significant quadratic correlations with facial attractiveness, with r values from 0.203 to 0.529. The top 12 parameters that had a significant quadratic correlation with facial attractiveness were ANB angle (r = 0.529, MAV = 2.3°), NA-APo (0.505, 3.9°), G'-Sn-Pog' (0.467, 11.1°), UL-EP (0.440, -0.3 mm), Wits (0.415, 0.1 mm), facial angle (0.374, 89.1°), FMIA (0.374, 63.6°), Pog' to G Vert (0.374, 0.7 mm), N' Vert-Pog'(0.368, 4.2 mm), SNB(0.367, 79.2°), L1-NB (0.346, 5.3 mm) and L1-NB (0.340, 25.2°), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The protrusion of the upper lip and the anteroposterior position of the mandible may be the primary cephalometric parameters related to subjective facial profile perceptions. The position of the lower incisor contributed more to facial attractiveness than the upper incisor. It is noteworthy that the normal values for most cephalometric measurements differ significantly from the MAV, indicating that these normal values do not accurately reflect facial attractiveness.