Public Perception of Ideal Areola Proportions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In breast reconstruction, mastopexy, and breast reduction procedures, surgeons make decisions about the resulting areola size, and this significantly impacts the overall aesthetic result. Despite the importance of these decisions, little is known about the general population's preferences for areola size. The objective of this study was to survey the global population to better understand the public's perceptions of ideal areola dimensions. METHODS: A survey was developed with 9 different composite diagrams of a female torso (every combination of 3 breast widths and 3 waist widths). In each composite diagram, 6 different areola sizes were shown (areola-to-breast diameter ranging from 1:12 to 6:12). The survey was distributed via the Amazon Mechanical Turk digital platform, and respondents' demographics (sex, age, race/ethnicity, country, and state if located in the United States) and preferences for the most aesthetically pleasing size in each composite diagram were recorded. RESULTS: Among 2259 participants, with 1283 male (56.8%) and 976 female (43.2%), most participants were between 25 and 34 years old (1012, 44.8%), were from the United States (1669, 73.9%), and identified as White (1430, 63.3%). With 9 breast width and waist width combinations, the respondents were most likely to prefer the 2:12 (32.9%) areola-to-breast ratio ( P < 0.0001). The second most commonly preferred ratio was 3:12 (30.6%) ( P < 0.0001). Gender subgroup analysis showed that women preferred middle-range ratios, such as 2:12, 3:12, and 4:12 ( P < 0.0001). Meanwhile, men were more likely to prefer extreme ratios of 1:12 or 6:12 ( P < 0.0001). Across almost all races/ethnicities, 2:12 was significantly the most popular, except among American Indian/Alaskan Native and Middle Eastern where 3:12 was the most preferred ( P < 0.0001). Within the top 6 countries (United States, India, Brazil, Italy, Canada, United Kingdom), the United States, India, and Italy preferred 2:12, and Brazil, Canada, and the United Kingdom preferred 3:12 ( P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first objective data on public impressions of the ideal areola proportions and can serve as a guide for surgical decision making in breast reconstruction and reshaping procedures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".