Avicenna Journal of Dental Research

Published by: Kowsar

Iranian Viewpoint about Various Attractiveness Indices of Rhinoplasty in comparison with International Standards

Ali Heidari 1 , Mohammad Reza Jamalpour 1 , Fariborz Faghihi 1 , * and Farshid Vahdatinia 2
Authors Information
1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Faculty Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamedan, Iran
2 Dental Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
Article information
  • Avicenna Journal of Dental Research: December 2017, 9 (4); e60362
  • Published Online: December 31, 2017
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: August 16, 2017
  • Accepted: December 3, 2017
  • DOI: 10.5812/ajdr.60362

To Cite: Heidari A, Jamalpour M R, Faghihi F, Vahdatinia F. Iranian Viewpoint about Various Attractiveness Indices of Rhinoplasty in comparison with International Standards, Avicenna J Dent Res. 2017 ;9(4):e60362. doi: 10.5812/ajdr.60362.

Copyright © 2017, Avicenna Journal of Dental Research. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
  • 1. Algozzine B. Perceived attractiveness and classroom interactions. J Exp Educ. 2015;46(1):63-6. doi: 10.1080/00220973.1977.11011612.
  • 2. Boyatzis CJ, Baloff P, Durieux C. Effects of perceived attractiveness and academic success on early adolescent peer popularity. J Genet Psychol. 1998;159(3):337-44. doi: 10.1080/00221329809596155. [PubMed: 9729839].
  • 3. Hafezi F, Kouchakzadeh K, Naghibzadeh B. History and status of nose surgery. Iran J Surg. 2009;17(2):88-94.
  • 4. Hwang HS, Kim WS, McNamara JJ. Ethnic differences in the soft tissue profile of Korean and European-American adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. Angle Orthod. 2002;72(1):72-80. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2002)072<0072:EDITST>2.0.CO;2. [PubMed: 11843277].
  • 5. Pitak-Arnnop P, Hemprich A, Dhanuthai K, Yildirim V, Pausch NC. Panel and patient perceptions of nasal aesthetics after secondary cleft rhinoplasty with versus without columellar grafting. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2011;39(5):319-25. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2010.07.007. [PubMed: 20832328].
  • 6. Borelli C, Berneburg M. "Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder"? Aspects of beauty and attractiveness. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2010;8(5):326-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1610-0387.2009.07318_supp.x. [PubMed: 20537001].
  • 7. Baudouin JY, Tiberghien G. Symmetry, averageness, and feature size in the facial attractiveness of women. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2004;117(3):313-32. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.07.002. [PubMed: 15500809].
  • 8. Perrett DI, May KA, Yoshikawa S. Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness. Nature. 1994;368(6468):239-42. doi: 10.1038/368239a0. [PubMed: 8145822].
  • 9. Auger TA, Turley PK. The female soft tissue profile as presented in fashion magazines during the 1900s: a photographic analysis. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1999;14(1):7-18. [PubMed: 10337246].
  • 10. Pogrel MA. What are normal esthetic values?. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991;49(9):963-9. [PubMed: 1886024].
  • 11. Cross JF, Cross J. Age, sex, race, and the perception of facial beauty. Dev Psychol. 1971;5(3):433-9. doi: 10.1037/h0031591.
  • 12. Naini FB, Cobourne MT, Garagiola U, McDonald F, Wertheim D. Nasofacial angle and nasal prominence: A quantitative investigation of idealized and normative values. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(4):446-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.01.010. [PubMed: 26880014].
  • 13. Naini FB, Donaldson AN, Cobourne MT, McDonald F. Assessing the influence of mandibular prominence on perceived attractiveness in the orthognathic patient, clinician, and layperson. Eur J Orthod. 2012;34(6):738-46. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjr098. [PubMed: 21846874].
  • 14. McArdle A, Young R, Kelly MH. Preferences for the white female nasal supratip break. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;68(4):366-8. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31823f3ca1. [PubMed: 22421480].
  • 15. Valentine T, Darling S, Donnelly M. Why are average faces attractive? The effect of view and averageness on the attractiveness of female faces. Psychon Bull Rev. 2004;11(3):482-7. [PubMed: 15376799].
  • 16. Abu Arqoub SH, Al-Khateeb SN. Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions. Eur J Orthod. 2011;33(1):103-11. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjq028. [PubMed: 20558590].
  • 17. Kaipainen AE, Sieber KR, Nada RM, Maal TJ, Katsaros C, Fudalej PS. Regional facial asymmetries and attractiveness of the face. Eur J Orthod. 2016;38(6):602-8. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjv087. [PubMed: 26666568].
  • 18. O Neill K, Harkness M, Knight R. Ratings of profile attractiveness after functional appliance treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;118(4):371-6. doi: 10.1067/mod.2000.109492. [PubMed: 11029730].
  • 19. Gandhi P, Patel K, Arora PS, Patel N. The Perception of facial profile attractiveness by changing the lower facial vertical and antero posterior proportion. Natl J Integr Res Med. 2016;7(6).
  • 20. Springer IN, Zernial O, Nolke F, Warnke PH, Wiltfang J, Russo PA, et al. Gender and nasal shape: measures for rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(2):629-37. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000298095.18943.72. [PubMed: 18300984].
  • 21. Springer IN, Zernial O, Warnke PH, Wiltfang J, Russo PA, Wolfart S. Nasal shape and gender of the observer: implications for rhinoplasty. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009;37(1):3-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2008.04.001. [PubMed: 18485721].
  • 22. Gomes GA, Tomita S, Guimaraes GS, Lima CF, Mosciaro MS, Simas TB. Aesthetic comparison of the ideal nasal radix height in Brazilians. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;77(3):334-40. [PubMed: 21739008].
  • 23. Lanier HB, Byrne J. How high school students view women, the relationship between perceived attractiveness, occupation, and education. Sex Roles. 1981;7(2):145-8. doi: 10.1007/bf00287800.
  • 24. Lu Y, Zhang X. Analysis of facial profile preferences among the Chinese population. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2000;35(3):224-6.
  • 25. Zylinski CG, Nanda RS, Kapila S. Analysis of soft tissue facial profile in white males. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992;101(6):514-8. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(92)70125-T. [PubMed: 1598891].
Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:



Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments