{"title":"Umbilical Aesthetics in Kenya: A Survey of Shape, Position, and Gender Preferences.","authors":"Sama K Fofung, Benjamin Wabwire, Joseph K Wanjeri","doi":"10.1097/GOX.0000000000007171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although the golden ratio (1.62) is frequently proposed for ideal umbilical positioning, aesthetic judgments vary across cultures and individual preferences. This survey examined shape and ratio preferences among Kenyan adults, exploring whether local norms (1.69) or the golden ratio (1.62) better match subjective ideals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with 440 participants recruited from a Kenyan referral hospital. Five umbilical shapes (oval, vertical, T-shaped, horizontal, and distorted/protruded) were digitally positioned at 1.62 or 1.69. Respondents selected their preferred position, identified most/least attractive shapes, and indicated separate choices for masculine versus feminine figures. Statistical analyses were done using χ² tests and logistic regressions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The gender distribution was balanced, with 48.9% men and 51.1% women. Overall, 55% favored 1.62 for oval, vertical, T-shaped, and horizontal shapes, whereas distorted was often chosen at 1.69 (52.5%). The vertical shape was ranked the most attractive overall (39.8%), especially for feminine figures (55.9%). Men showed significantly greater preference than women for distorted shapes (odds ratio = 2.89; <i>P</i> = 0.010). Oval and T-shaped were equally popular for masculine figures (29.1% each).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Kenyan preferences lean toward the classic golden ratio in certain shapes, but not universally. Distorted navels garnered significant support at the local 1.69 ratio, underscoring that patient desires do not strictly align with a single numeric standard. This preference-based study complements morphometric data from a companion article, highlighting the interplay between objective norms and subjective ideals in Kenyan abdominal aesthetics.</p>","PeriodicalId":20149,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","volume":"13 10","pages":"e7171"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12490648/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000007171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Although the golden ratio (1.62) is frequently proposed for ideal umbilical positioning, aesthetic judgments vary across cultures and individual preferences. This survey examined shape and ratio preferences among Kenyan adults, exploring whether local norms (1.69) or the golden ratio (1.62) better match subjective ideals.
Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with 440 participants recruited from a Kenyan referral hospital. Five umbilical shapes (oval, vertical, T-shaped, horizontal, and distorted/protruded) were digitally positioned at 1.62 or 1.69. Respondents selected their preferred position, identified most/least attractive shapes, and indicated separate choices for masculine versus feminine figures. Statistical analyses were done using χ² tests and logistic regressions.
Results: The gender distribution was balanced, with 48.9% men and 51.1% women. Overall, 55% favored 1.62 for oval, vertical, T-shaped, and horizontal shapes, whereas distorted was often chosen at 1.69 (52.5%). The vertical shape was ranked the most attractive overall (39.8%), especially for feminine figures (55.9%). Men showed significantly greater preference than women for distorted shapes (odds ratio = 2.89; P = 0.010). Oval and T-shaped were equally popular for masculine figures (29.1% each).
Conclusions: Kenyan preferences lean toward the classic golden ratio in certain shapes, but not universally. Distorted navels garnered significant support at the local 1.69 ratio, underscoring that patient desires do not strictly align with a single numeric standard. This preference-based study complements morphometric data from a companion article, highlighting the interplay between objective norms and subjective ideals in Kenyan abdominal aesthetics.
期刊介绍:
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open is an open access, peer reviewed, international journal focusing on global plastic and reconstructive surgery.Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open publishes on all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including basic science/experimental studies pertinent to the field and also clinical articles on such topics as: breast reconstruction, head and neck surgery, pediatric and craniofacial surgery, hand and microsurgery, wound healing, and cosmetic and aesthetic surgery. Clinical studies, experimental articles, ideas and innovations, and techniques and case reports are all welcome article types. Manuscript submission is open to all surgeons, researchers, and other health care providers world-wide who wish to communicate their research results on topics related to plastic and reconstructive surgery. Furthermore, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open, a complimentary journal to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, provides an open access venue for the publication of those research studies sponsored by private and public funding agencies that require open access publication of study results. Its mission is to disseminate high quality, peer reviewed research in plastic and reconstructive surgery to the widest possible global audience, through an open access platform. As an open access journal, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open offers its content for free to any viewer. Authors of articles retain their copyright to the materials published. Additionally, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open provides rapid review and publication of accepted papers.