ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2020
National Survey of US Plastic Surgeon Experience with Female Genital Mutilation.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Addressing Female Genital Cutting among service providers in New York.Professional psychology, research and practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Female genital mutilation (FGM) is a growing problem in the United States, with the past few decades showing a dramatic increase in prevalence. This study aims to understand the plastic surgeon experience with FGM and inform preparedness for this rising problem.
methodsA 26-question survey was developed and electronically distributed to a random cohort of 2,508 active American Society of Plastic Surgeons members. It was sent three times over a 3-week period in 2018. χ2 statistical tests were used to analyze outcomes, assuming a
resultsThere was a 7% survey response rate (n=180). Demographic profiles reflected a range of practice types, geographical distribution, and years of experience. Ninety-five percent of respondents had heard of FGM (n=169). Sixty-seven percent were aware that surgical reconstructive options exist for FGM (n=115), with only 5% reporting any formal training on the topic (n=10). Only 13.6% of those surveyed felt prepared to care for a woman with FGM (n=23).
conclusionsAfter surveying plastic surgeons, responses demonstrate that while the majority are familiar with FGM, very few are comfortable or prepared for the care and surgical management of this patient population. Although this study is limited by a low response rate, we believe that the results reflect an existing knowledge gap and demonstrate the need for formal training. This may help to bridge this gap and prepare surgeons to care for this population.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.