Stomatologiia · 2023
[Expert judgement of face profile].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Оригинал на русском
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.
Danilova M A, Ishmurzin P V, Konkova A M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to determinate the values of the parameters of the face profile that ensure the harmony of the architectonics of the facial composition, taking into account sexual dimorphism.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: 22 independent orthodontists were invited as experts (11 men, average age is 36.8±1.2 years; 11 women, average age is 35.3±2.2 years). Experts questioning implemented the preference vectors method using randomly arranged male and female face profile schemes with variable parameters.
RESULTS: Male profile expert judgement average maximum was obtained for following indicator values: face convex angle 8°, nasolabial angle 105°, mentolabial angle - 135°, lip protrusion angle 130°, nasofacial angle 35°, projection nose length 17 mm and 19 mm, vertical ratio of upper lip height to lower lip with chin height 0.45 and 0.50. Female profile expert judgement average maximum was obtained for following indicator values: face convex angle 8° and 10°, nasolabial angle 95°, mentolabial angle 115°, lip protrusion angle 130°, nasofacial angle 35°, projection length nose - 17 mm, vertical ratio of upper lip height to lower lip with chin height 0.50.
CONCLUSION: Facial profile attractiveness evaluation of Caucasian face profile showed gender dependence for face convex angle, nasolabial and mentolabial angles, projection nose length. Female profile compared to male profile is characterized by greater convexity, sharper nasolabial angle, marked supramental sulcus and shorter nose length. We have also determined that male face profile is characterized by wider range of indicators acceptable variations than female one.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: 22 independent orthodontists were invited as experts (11 men, average age is 36.8±1.2 years; 11 women, average age is 35.3±2.2 years). Experts questioning implemented the preference vectors method using randomly arranged male and female face profile schemes with variable parameters.
RESULTS: Male profile expert judgement average maximum was obtained for following indicator values: face convex angle 8°, nasolabial angle 105°, mentolabial angle - 135°, lip protrusion angle 130°, nasofacial angle 35°, projection nose length 17 mm and 19 mm, vertical ratio of upper lip height to lower lip with chin height 0.45 and 0.50. Female profile expert judgement average maximum was obtained for following indicator values: face convex angle 8° and 10°, nasolabial angle 95°, mentolabial angle 115°, lip protrusion angle 130°, nasofacial angle 35°, projection length nose - 17 mm, vertical ratio of upper lip height to lower lip with chin height 0.50.
CONCLUSION: Facial profile attractiveness evaluation of Caucasian face profile showed gender dependence for face convex angle, nasolabial and mentolabial angles, projection nose length. Female profile compared to male profile is characterized by greater convexity, sharper nasolabial angle, marked supramental sulcus and shorter nose length. We have also determined that male face profile is characterized by wider range of indicators acceptable variations than female one.