- •Significant differences were found between attractive profiles and cephalometric norms.
- •Attractive males had greater soft tissue chin thickness compared with females.
- •Males with orthodontically normal profiles and thicker upper lips were more attractive.
- •Females with a slightly convex profile and less prominent noses were more attractive.
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists
- Soft tissue cephalometric norms of Iranian Class I adults with good occlusions and balanced faces.Int Orthod. 2016; 14: 108-122
- Facial anthropometric norms of the young Iranian population.J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2018; 17: 150-157
- Comparison of cephalometric norms of esthetically pleasing faces.J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2009; 19: 754-758
- Factors influencing attractiveness of soft tissue profile.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013; 115: 29-37
- Cephalometric studies of Ukrainian boys and girls with orthognathic bite by the method of R. M. Ricketts.Ultrasound Med Bio. 2018; 14: 088
- Cephalometric norms and esthetic profile preference for the Japanese: a systematic review.Dental Press J Orthod. 2015; 20: 43-51
- Evaluation of soft tissue parameters for adults with accepted occlusion using Legan and Burstone analysis.Tanta Dent J. 2015; 12: 1-6
- Evaluation of soft tissue norms on lateral cephalograms in babol.CJDR. 2017; 6: 30-34
- Soft-tissue anthropometric norms of Iranians with proper occlusion and inter-ethnic norm comparisons.J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2018; 17: 588-596
- Comparison of soft tissue cephalometric norms between Turkish and European-American adults.ScientificWorldJournal. 2013; 2013806203
- An evaluation of the soft-tissue facial profile in the North American black woman.Am J Orthod. 1979; 76: 84-94
- Soft-tissue cephalometric norms in Chinese adults with esthetic facial profiles.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992; 50 (discussion 1189): 1184-1189
- A study of the harmonious profile in facial esthetics. Part 1. Descriptive statistics.Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 1999; 40: 35-46
- Psychometric and Perceptometric comparisons of the perspectives of orthodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons, and laypeople of different ages and sexes towards beauty of female jaw angles (intergonial widths and gonial heights) on frontal and three-quarter views.BioMed Res Int. 2022; 20222595662
- Facial attractiveness: general patterns of facial preferences.Anthropol Rev. 2007; 70: 45-79
- Facial attractiveness: variation, adaptiveness and consequences of facial preferences.Anthropol Rev. 2008; 71: 77-105
- Professional assessment of facial profile attractiveness.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 128: 201-205
- Soft tissue cephalometric norms in Japanese adults.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118: 84-89
- Photographic soft-tissue profile analysis in children at 6 years of age.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132: 475-480
- Photographic facial soft tissue analysis of healthy Iranian young adults: anthropometric and angular measurements.Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2014; 28: 49
- Facial height comparison in young white and black Brazilian subjects with normal occlusion.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 131 (e1–706.e6): 706
- Soft tissue facial profile of normal dental and skeletal subjects in Croatian population aged 12 to 15 years.Coll Antropol. 2008; 32: 523-528
- Effects of age and gender on hard and soft tissue cephalometric features of an Iranian population over 12 years old.J Kerman Univ Med Sci. 2022; 29: 507-519
- Inter and intra-rater reliability of lateral cephalometric analysis using 2D dolphin imaging software.J Dent Sch. 2020; 38: 148-152
- Ethnic differences in the soft tissue profiles of Turkish and European-American young adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces.Eur J Orthod. 2012; 34: 296-301
- Contemporary treatment of dentofacial deformity.Mosby, St Louis, MO2003: 100-101
- Factors associated with the beauty of soft-tissue profile.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019; 155: 832-843
- Common standards in facial esthetics: craniofacial analysis of most attractive black and white subjects according to People magazine during previous 10 years.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69: e216-e224
- Analysis of soft tissue facial profile in white males.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992; 101: 514-518
- Esthetic preferences of European American, Hispanic American, Japanese, and African judges for soft-tissue profiles, Japanese.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 135: S87-S95
- Soft-tissue cephalometric norms in Yemeni men.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132 (e7–14): 576
- Skeletofacial morphology of attractive and nonattractive faces.Angle Orthod. 2006; 76: 204-210
Publication stageIn Press Corrected Proof
Funding: This research was funded by Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Research Institute for Dental Sciences.
Competing interests: Authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. None declared.
Provenance and peer review: Non-commissioned; externally peer reviewed.