↓ Skip to main content

Facial profile esthetics in operated children with bilateral cleft lip and palate

Overview of attention for article published in Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Facial profile esthetics in operated children with bilateral cleft lip and palate
Published in
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, August 2017
DOI 10.1590/2177-6709.22.4.041-046.oar
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rita de Cássia Moura Carvalho Lauris, Leopoldino Capelozza Filho, Louise Resti Calil, José Roberto Pereira Lauris, Guilherme Janson, Daniela Gamba Garib

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the facial profile esthetics of rehabilitated children with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP), comparing the judgment of professionals related and not related to cleft rehabilitation and laypersons. Thirty children in the mixed dentition (24 male; 6 female) with a mean age of 7.8 years were evaluated using facial profile photographs by 25 examiners: 5 orthodontists and 5 plastic surgeons with experience in cleft care, 5 orthodontists and 5 plastic surgeons without experience in oral cleft rehabilitation and 5 graduated laymen. Their facial profiles were classified into esthetically unpleasant (grade 1 to 3), esthetically acceptable (grade 4 to 6), and esthetically pleasant (grade 7 to 9). Intraexaminer and interexaminer errors were evaluated using Spearman correlation coefficient and Kendall's test, respectively. Inter-rater differences were analyzed using Friedman test and Student-Newman-Keuls test for multiple comparisons. Orthodontists dealing with oral clefts rehabilitation considered the majority of the sample as esthetically pleasant. Plastic surgeons of the cleft team and laypersons classified most of the sample as esthetically acceptable. Most of the orthodontists and plastic surgeons not related to cleft care evaluated the facial profile as esthetically unpleasant. The structures associated to unpleasant profiles were the nose, the midface and the upper lip. The facial profile of children with BCLP was classified as esthetically acceptable by laypersons. Professionals related to cleft rehabilitation were more lenient and those not related to cleft care were stricter to facial esthetics than laypersons.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 21%
Other 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 7 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Psychology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Unknown 9 38%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 September 2017.
All research outputs
#11,059,315
of 12,440,694 outputs
Outputs from Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
#145
of 213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,285
of 267,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,440,694 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 213 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.