Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38138173›Full record

ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2023

Facial Feminization Surgery: Anatomical Differences, Preoperative Planning, Techniques, and Ethical Considerations.

Sarah L Barnett, Joshua Choe, Christopher Aiello, James P Bradley

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Lip feminization: A review.JPRAS open · 2024
    Review
  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

4 authors.

Sarah L BarnettPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8967-3997
Joshua ChoeNorthwell Health Division of Plastic Surgery, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, NY 11042, USA.
Christopher AielloNorthwell Health Division of Plastic Surgery, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, NY 11042, USA.
James P BradleyNorthwell Health Division of Plastic Surgery, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, NY 11042, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Facial Feminization Surgery (FFS) is a transformative surgical approach aimed at aligning the facial features of transgender women with their gender identity. Through a systematic analysis, this paper explores the clinical differences between male and female facial skeletons along with the craniofacial techniques employed in FFS for each region. The preoperative planning stage is highlighted, emphasizing the importance of virtual planning and AI morphing as valuable tools to be used to achieve surgical precision. Consideration is given to special circumstances, such as procedure sequencing for older patients and silicone removal. Clinical outcomes, through patient-reported outcome measures and AI-based gender-typing assessments, showcase the efficacy of FFS in achieving proper gender recognition and alleviating gender dysphoria. This comprehensive review not only offers valuable insights into the current state of knowledge regarding FFS but also emphasizes the potential of artificial intelligence in outcome evaluation and surgical planning to further advance patient care and satisfaction with FFS.

Indexed as

FeminizationTranssexualismArtificial IntelligenceFaceFemaleGender IdentityHumansMaleartificial intelligencefacial feminization surgerygender dysphoriavirtual surgical planning

Identifiers

PMID38138173
PMCPMC10744788

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.