Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37122823›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of transgender health2023

Outcome measures reported following feminizing genital gender affirmation surgery for transgender women and gender diverse individuals: A systematic review.

Thomas E Pidgeon, Thomas Franchi, Andre C Q Lo, Ginimol Mathew, Heer V Shah, Despoina Iakovou, Mimi R Borrelli, Catrin Sohrabi, Tina Rashid

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of transgender health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Thomas E PidgeonUniversity Hospital Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1776-3640
Thomas FranchiUniversity of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK.
Andre C Q LoUniversity of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7339-6809
Ginimol MathewYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5939-8258
Heer V ShahBasildon University Hospital, Basildon, UK.
Despoina IakovouBarts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK.
Mimi R BorrelliDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Brown University, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA.
Catrin SohrabiBarts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK.
Tina RashidDepartment of Gender Surgery, Parkside Hospital, London, UK.
Queen Mary University of London · GBBasildon Hospital · GBBrown University · USSt George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBThe Edgbaston Hospital · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GBYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Feminizing genital gender affirmation surgery (fgGAS) may be an essential adjunct in the care of some transgender women and gender diverse individuals with gender incongruence. However, the comparison of different techniques of fgGAS may be confounded by variable outcome reporting and the use of inconsistent outcomes in the literature. This systematic review provides the most in-depth examination of fgGAS studies to date, and summarizes all reported outcomes, definitions, and the times when outcomes were assessed following these surgical interventions. Results: After screening 1225 studies, 93 studies proceeded to data extraction, representing 7681 patients. 2621 separate individual outcomes were reported, 857 (32.7%) were defined, and the time of outcome assessment was given for 1856 outcomes (70.8%) but relied on nonspecific ranges of follow-up dates. "Attainment of orgasm", "Neovaginal stenosis", and "Neovaginal depth/length" were among the most commonly reported outcomes. Profound heterogeneity existed in the definitions used for these and for all outcomes reported in general. Discussion: The results demonstrate a need for clear outcomes, agreed definitions, and times of outcome assessment following fgGAS in transgender women and gender diverse individuals. The adoption of a consistent set of outcomes and definitions reported by all future studies of fgGAS (a Core Outcome Set) will aid in improving treatment comparisons in this patient group. This review is the first step in that process.

Indexed as

Feminizing genital gender affirmation surgeryoutcomestransgender personsvariable outcome reporting

Identifiers

PMID37122823
PMCPMC10132236
OpenAlexW4311062226

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.