ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2023
Clitoral reconstruction: challenges and new directions.
Review in International journal of impotence research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Female genital mutilation/cutting burden and perceptions among asylum-seeking women in Berlin, Germany: A cross-sectional study.Journal of migration and health · 2026Article
- Healthcare and community perspectives on female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C): a qualitative study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Changing gender norms around female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C): a key role for social work in the Global North.Frontiers in sociology · 2023Review
- "Damaged genitals"-Cut women's perceptions of the effect of female genital cutting on sexual function. A qualitative study from Sweden.Frontiers in sociology · 2022Article
- Clitoral reconstruction and psychosexual care after female genital mutilation/cutting: Assessment of multidisciplinary care.Women's health (London, England)Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clitoral reconstruction (CR) has been the subject of several studies in recent years, mainly in the medical field. Women with female genital mutilation or cutting (FGM/C) seek clitoral reconstructive surgery to improve their sexual well-being, but also because they are affected by poor self- and body image. CR is supposed to help women with FGM/C reconstruct their sense of self, but the benefits and risks of this surgery have not been sufficiently explored. There are currently no recommendations supporting CR from mainstream medical bodies, and there have been very few ethical studies of the procedure. This article critically discusses the principal studies produced in the medical field and available reflections produced in the social sciences. Through the theoretical frameworks of postcolonial and feminist studies, the article discusses sexuality and pleasure, gender and identity, and race and positionality, with the aim of promoting collaborative work on CR between researchers and social and health professionals.
Indexed as
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.