179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15959632)
1. Perceived relative attractiveness of facial profiles with varying degrees of skeletal anomalies.
Hönn M; Dietz K; Godt A; Göz G
J Orofac Orthop; 2005 May; 66(3):187-96. PubMed ID: 15959632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Attractiveness of facial profiles as rated by individuals with different levels of education.
Hönn M; Dietz K; Eiselt ML; Göz G
J Orofac Orthop; 2008 Jan; 69(1):20-30. PubMed ID: 18213458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. An Asian community's perspective on facial profile attractiveness.
Soh J; Chew MT; Wong HB
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 2007 Feb; 35(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 17244134
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of the perception of facial profile by the general public and 3 groups of clinicians.
Cochrane SM; Cunningham SJ; Hunt NP
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1999; 14(4):291-5. PubMed ID: 10895644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparison of providers' and consumers' perceptions of facial-profile attractiveness.
Maple JR; Vig KW; Beck FM; Larsen PE; Shanker S
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Dec; 128(6):690-6; quiz 801. PubMed ID: 16360907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Orthodontists' and laypersons' aesthetic assessment of Class III subjects referred for orthognathic surgery.
Fabré M; Mossaz C; Christou P; Kiliaridis S
Eur J Orthod; 2009 Aug; 31(4):443-8. PubMed ID: 19395371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions.
Abu Arqoub SH; Al-Khateeb SN
Eur J Orthod; 2011 Feb; 33(1):103-11. PubMed ID: 20558590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing the influence of lower facial profile convexity on perceived attractiveness in the orthognathic patient, clinician, and layperson.
Naini FB; Donaldson AN; McDonald F; Cobourne MT
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2012 Sep; 114(3):303-11. PubMed ID: 22883980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Skeletal types: key to unraveling the mystery of facial beauty and its biologic significance.
Jefferson Y
J Gen Orthod; 1996 Jun; 7(2):7-25. PubMed ID: 9508852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Facial attractiveness and abnormality of nasal reconstruction patients and controls assessed by laypersons.
Moolenburgh SE; Mureau MA; Hofer SO
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg; 2008 Jun; 61(6):676-80. PubMed ID: 18222114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comparative assessment of the perception of Chinese facial profile esthetics.
Soh J; Chew MT; Wong HB
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Jun; 127(6):692-9. PubMed ID: 15953894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Perceptions of facial aesthetics in two and three dimensions.
Todd SA; Hammond P; Hutton T; Cochrane S; Cunningham S
Eur J Orthod; 2005 Aug; 27(4):363-9. PubMed ID: 15961568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The influence of mandibular prominence on facial attractiveness.
Johnston C; Hunt O; Burden D; Stevenson M; Hepper P
Eur J Orthod; 2005 Apr; 27(2):129-33. PubMed ID: 15817618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Significance of the soft tissue profile on facial esthetics.
Spyropoulos MN; Halazonetis DJ
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2001 May; 119(5):464-71. PubMed ID: 11343017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons to altered dental esthetics: asymmetric and symmetric situations.
Kokich VO; Kokich VG; Kiyak HA
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Aug; 130(2):141-51. PubMed ID: 16905057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Face perception in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate and patients with severe Class III malocclusion compared to controls.
Meyer-Marcotty P; Kochel J; Boehm H; Linz C; Klammert U; Stellzig-Eisenhauer A
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2011 Apr; 39(3):158-63. PubMed ID: 20580240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Ranking facial attractiveness.
Knight H; Keith O
Eur J Orthod; 2005 Aug; 27(4):340-8. PubMed ID: 16043472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Angles of facial convexity in different skeletal Classes.
Godt A; Müller A; Kalwitzki M; Göz G
Eur J Orthod; 2007 Dec; 29(6):648-53. PubMed ID: 17878186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Dissociating averageness and attractiveness: attractive faces are not always average.
DeBruine LM; Jones BC; Unger L; Little AC; Feinberg DR
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Dec; 33(6):1420-30. PubMed ID: 18085954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Perception of facial attractiveness by patients, peers, and professionals.
Phillips C; Griffin T; Bennett E
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1995; 10(2):127-35. PubMed ID: 9081998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
