Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 160

1.

Evolving attractive faces using morphing technology and a genetic algorithm: a new approach to determining ideal facial aesthetics.

Wong BJ, Karimi K, Devcic Z, McLaren CE, Chen WP.

Laryngoscope. 2008 Jun;118(6):962-74. doi: 10.1097/MLG.0b013e31816bf545.

2.

A Quantitative Approach to Determining the Ideal Female Lip Aesthetic and Its Effect on Facial Attractiveness.

Popenko NA, Tripathi PB, Devcic Z, Karimi K, Osann K, Wong BJF.

JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017 Jul 1;19(4):261-267. doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2016.2049.

PMID:
28208179
3.

Morphological quantitative criteria and aesthetic evaluation of eight female Han face types.

Zhao Q, Zhou R, Zhang X, Sun H, Lu X, Xia D, Song M, Liang Y.

Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2013 Apr;37(2):445-53. doi: 10.1007/s00266-013-0081-9. Epub 2013 Feb 13.

PMID:
23404449
4.

A new approach in determining lateral facial attractiveness.

Karimi K, Devcic Z, Avila D, Popenko N, Wong B.

Laryngoscope. 2010;120 Suppl 4:S157. doi: 10.1002/lary.21621.

PMID:
21225755
5.

A web-based method for rating facial attractiveness.

Devcic Z, Karimi K, Popenko N, Wong BJ.

Laryngoscope. 2010 May;120(5):902-6. doi: 10.1002/lary.20857.

PMID:
20422683
6.

Identifying ideal brow vector position: empirical analysis of three brow archetypes.

Hamamoto AA, Liu TW, Wong BJ.

Facial Plast Surg. 2013 Feb;29(1):76-82. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1333841. Epub 2013 Feb 20.

PMID:
23426756
7.

Ideal proportions in full face front view, contemporary versus antique.

Mommaerts MY, Moerenhout BA.

J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2011 Mar;39(2):107-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2010.04.012. Epub 2010 Jun 12. Erratum in: J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2013 Dec;41(8):705.

PMID:
20542444
8.

The virtual focus group: a modern methodology for facial attractiveness rating.

Popenko NA, Devcic Z, Karimi K, Wong BJ.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012 Sep;130(3):455e-61e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31825dcb48.

PMID:
22929271
9.

Effects of Objective 3-Dimensional Measures of Facial Shape and Symmetry on Perceptions of Facial Attractiveness.

Hatch CD, Wehby GL, Nidey NL, Moreno Uribe LM.

J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Sep;75(9):1958-1970. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2017.04.042. Epub 2017 May 10.

PMID:
28577372
10.

Morphometric facial analysis: a methodology to create lateral facial images.

Karimi K, Devcic Z, Popenko N, Oyoyo U, Wong BJ.

Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Dec;19(4):403-10. doi: 10.1007/s10006-015-0512-7. Epub 2015 Jun 18.

PMID:
26084451
11.

Software-based evaluation of human attractiveness: a pilot study.

Patzelt SB, Schaible LK, Stampf S, Kohal RJ.

J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Nov;112(5):1176-81. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.06.013. Epub 2014 Sep 11.

PMID:
25218031
12.

Facial attractiveness: is the whole more than the sum of its parts?

Sharabi SE, Hatef DA, Hollier LH Jr.

Aesthet Surg J. 2010 Mar;30(2):154-60. doi: 10.1177/1090820X10369370.

PMID:
20442090
13.

Contribution of malocclusion and female facial attractiveness to smile esthetics evaluated by eye tracking.

Richards MR, Fields HW Jr, Beck FM, Firestone AR, Walther DB, Rosenstiel S, Sacksteder JM.

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015 Apr;147(4):472-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.12.016.

PMID:
25836007
14.

Panel perception of facial appearance of cleft patients generated by use of a morphing technique.

Yildirim V, Hemprich A, Gr√ľndl M, Pausch NC.

Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Sep;18(3):331-40. doi: 10.1007/s10006-014-0441-x. Epub 2014 Jan 19.

PMID:
24442369
15.

The influence of position and context on facial attractiveness.

Rodway P, Schepman A, Lambert J.

Acta Psychol (Amst). 2013 Nov;144(3):522-9. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.09.004. Epub 2013 Oct 16.

PMID:
24140819
17.

Smile esthetics from patients' perspectives for faces of varying attractiveness.

Chang CA, Fields HW Jr, Beck FM, Springer NC, Firestone AR, Rosenstiel S, Christensen JC.

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Oct;140(4):e171-80. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.03.022.

PMID:
21967955
18.

Evolving faces from principal components.

Hancock PJ.

Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2000 May;32(2):327-33.

PMID:
10875181
19.

Facial aesthetics: babies prefer attractiveness to symmetry.

Samuels CA, Butterworth G, Roberts T, Graupner L, Hole G.

Perception. 2013;42(11):1244-52.

PMID:
24601036
20.

Golden proportions as predictors of attractiveness and malocclusion.

Rajiv A, Juhi Y.

Indian J Dent Res. 2014 Nov-Dec;25(6):788-93. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.152206.

Supplemental Content

Support Center