ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
The Limited Coverage of Facial Feminization Surgery in the United States: A Literature Review of Policy Constraints and Implications.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Insurance Coverage for Facial Masculinization Surgery Will Promote Gender-Affirming Health Equity.Transgender health · 2026Article
- Risk Factors and Complication Rates of Inpatient Genioplasty Procedures in the U.S. Healthcare System: A 22-Year Retrospective Multi-center Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Patient satisfaction following gender affirming facial surgery: a GENDER-Q and gender preoccupation and stability questionnaire study (GPSQ).Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Quantitative Analysis of Male Versus Female Frontal Bone and Orbital Skeletal Morphology.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Disparities in Facial Feminization Surgery Coverage: MassHealth Versus Private Insurance Coverage in Massachusetts.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- A Comparative Analysis of Full and Partial Gender-Affirming Facial Surgeries Surgical Complications and Trends: Insights from a NSQIP Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Article
- Body Contouring as Gender-Affirming Surgery in Transgender Patients: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a literature gap regarding facial feminization surgery (FFS) access and coverage. Our goal is to compile information from previous studies and assess the current policy landscape for these surgeries in the US. We also explored why some policies do not cover them, identify states with better coverage, and determine the most covered procedures. PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Scopus were searched for studies that reviewed policies on FFS coverage. Studies on surgical techniques or other gender-affirming surgeries (GASs) that did not involve FFS were excluded. Seven studies were included for analysis. In 2014, the Department of Human Health Services (HHS) lifted the transgender exclusion policy, leading to an increase in policies regarding GASs for both private and state insurance. However, there are differences in medical necessity requirements among policies, which may not align with the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) criteria. States that prohibit exclusion tend to offer better coverage for FFS. These states are mainly located in the western and northeast regions, whereas states in the southern and middle east regions have less coverage. Among the procedures, chondrolaryngoplasty is the most covered, while facial and cervical rhytidectomy are the least covered. To enhance transgender care, it is crucial to reach a consensus on how to offer coverage for facial feminization surgery. However, there is a lack of adequate research on this topic, and there is a need for resources and tools to assess the results of FFS procedures. One significant constraint of this study is that it does not provide a systematic review of the literature.
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.