Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
The Korean Journal of Orthodontics ; : 328-335, 2023.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1003097

ABSTRACT

Objective@#The aim of this study was to determine whether an association between study quality, other study characteristics, and Altmetric Attention Scores (AASs) existed in orthodontic studies. @*Methods@#The Scopus database was searched to identify orthodontic studies published between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019. Articles that satisfied the eligibility criteria were included in this study. Study characteristics, including study quality were extracted and entered into a pre-pilot data collection sheet. Descriptive statistics were calculated. On an exploratory basis, random forest and gradient boosting machine learning algorithms were used to examine the influence of article characteristics on AAS. @*Results@#In total, 586 studies with an AAS were analyzed.Overall, the mean AAS of the samples was 5. Twitter was the most popular social media platform for publicizing studies, accounting for 53.7%. In terms of study quality, only 19.1% of the studies were rated as having a high level of quality, with 41.8% of the studies deemed moderate quality. The type of social media platform, number of citations, impact factor, and study type were among the most influential characteristics of AAS in both models. In contrast, study quality was one of the least influential characteristics on the AAS. @*Conclusions@#Social media platforms contributed the most to the AAS for orthodontic studies, whereas study quality had little impact on the AAS.

2.
Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery ; : 4-2017.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-32562

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study is a quantitative evaluation of the influence of the mentolabial angle on perceived attractiveness and threshold values of desire for surgery. METHODS: The mentolabial angle of an idealized silhouette male Caucasian profile image was altered incrementally between 84° and 162°. Images were rated on a Likert scale by pretreatment orthognathic patients (n = 75), lay people (n = 75) and clinicians (n = 35). RESULTS: A mentolabial angle of approximately 107° to 118° was deemed the most attractive, with a range of up to 140° deemed acceptable. Angles above or below this range were perceived as unattractive, and anything outside the range of below 98° or above 162° was deemed very unattractive. A deep mentolabial angle (84°) or an almost flat angle (162°) was deemed the least attractive. In terms of threshold values of desire for surgery, for all groups, a threshold value of ≥162° and ≤84° indicated a preference for surgery, although clinicians were least likely to suggest surgery. The clinician group was the most consistent, and for many of the images, there was some variation in agreement between clinicians and lay people as to whether surgery is required. There was even more variability in the assessments for the patient group. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that in orthognathic and genioplasty planning, the range of normal variability of the mentolabial angle, in terms of observer acceptance, is taken into account as well as threshold values of desire for surgery. The importance of using patients as observers in attractiveness research is stressed.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Esthetics , Evaluation Studies as Topic , Genioplasty
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL