Body Mass Index and Facial Cues in Sasang Typology for Young and Elderly Persons

Table 3

Correlation between BMI and facial cues.

	20s^r		60s^r		Coetzee et al. [19]^r (age: 20s)		P value (Pham 20s versus Coetzee)		P value (Pham 20s versus Pham 60s)
	Male; (𝑛=230)	Female; (𝑛=229)	Male; (𝑛=219)	Female; (𝑛=234)	Male; (𝑛=187)	Female; (𝑛=194)	Male	Female	Male	Female
PAR	−0.30***	− 0.23***	− 0.18**	− 0.28***	− 0.22**	− 0.12	0.39	0.25	0.18	0.57
WHR	0.30***	0.28***	0.28***	0.06	0.17*	0.36***	0.16	0.36	0.82	2.43
CJWR	− 0.40***	− 0.29***	− 0.40***	− 0.27***	− 0.20**	− 0.29***	0.03	1	1	0.82
Eye size	0.29***	0.26***	0.27***	0.21**					0.82	0.57
LF/FH	0.12	0.10	0.07	0.29***
FW/LF	0.12	0.05	0.16*	0.052
EH mean	0.05	0.16*	0.11	0.12

^rPearson’s correlation coefficient; *𝑃<.05, **𝑃<.01, ***𝑃<.001. 20s: twenties group; 60s: sixties group.
𝑃 value calculated by Fisher’s z transformation approach, in which 𝑃<.05 indicates the significant difference of magnitude of two correlation coefficients.