Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31183292›Full record

ArticleCureus2019

Investigation of the Anthropometric Changes in Breast Volume and Measurements After Breast Reduction.

Ümran Muslu, Emre Demir, Fikri Özdemir, Vahdet Özkoçak, Engin Yıldırım

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ümran MusluPlastic Surgery, Hitit University Faculty of Medicine, Çorum, TUR.
Emre DemirBiostatistics, Hitit University Faculty of Medicine, Çorum, TUR.
Fikri ÖzdemirAnatomy, Hitit University Faculty of Medicine, Çorum, TUR.
Vahdet ÖzkoçakAnthropology, Hitit University Faculty of Science and Literature, Çorum, TUR.
Engin YıldırımObstetrics and Gynecology, Hitit University Faculty of Medicine, Çorum, TUR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective This study aims to compare breast volume changes and other anthropometric measurements by using before and after breast reduction pictures of women who underwent breast reduction operation in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery clinic and by performing measurements from the anatomic points indicated in the literature. Background Landmarks (previously identified as anatomic points) that show the success of breast reduction operation are not sufficient. Anthropometric points and their identification are of great importance for choosing the landmarks and identifying the statistical approaches to be used. Methods A total of 40 women were measured breast anthropometric measurements in pre- and post-operative breast reduction surgery changes by a photographic technique using Image J programme from the anatomical points determined in the literature. Comparison of right and left breast anthropometric measurements before and after the operation was performed using the paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots were used to determine the agreement between each pair of measurements. Results There was a statistically significant agreement between all the measurements (p<0.001). According to the Bland-Altman graphics, right and left breast measurements after the operation were within the limits of agreement according to all measurement points. Conclusion This study presented anthropometric measurements to show and guide patient satisfaction and aesthetic success of the operations performed by plastic surgeons.

Indexed as

anthropometric methodsbreast reductionbreast volume

Identifiers

PMID31183292
PMCPMC6538106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.