ArticleJPRAS open2024
Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes following Oncological Facial Reconstructive Surgery using the FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module.
Article in JPRAS open, 2024. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Study Design, Reconstructive Modalities, and Patient-Reported Outcome Documentation in a Curated Corpus of Facial Basal Cell Carcinoma Reconstruction Studies: An Exploratory Meta-Research Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Wide Awake Facial Reconstruction: A Literature Review, Cost Analysis, and Practical Guide.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Measuring Outcomes of Facial Skin Cancer Surgery Using the FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Patient-Orientated Evaluation of Treatment of Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer with Rhenium-188 Compared to Surgery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Construction of a predictive model for the effectiveness of plastic surgery and repair in patients with facial basal cell carcinoma.American journal of cancer research · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of oncological facial reconstructive surgery are unknown. Objective: The present study aimed to assess long-term PROs and to identify possible correlations between patient and treatment characteristics and long-term PROs. Methods & Materials: Between 2006 and 2011, 202 patients underwent facial reconstruction after Mohs micrographic surgery for non-melanoma skin cancer at our institution. After 10 years of follow-up, 96 out of the remaining 122 patients completed the FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module. Results: Patients who were surgically treated for squamous cell carcinoma reported poorer scores on the satisfaction with facial appearance (p=0.038), appraisal of scars (p=0.039) and appearance-related psychosocial distress scales (p=0.036) compared to patients with basal cell carcinoma and lentigo maligna. Finally, female patients reported significantly higher scores on the Cancer Worry Scale than male patients (p=0.047). Conclusion: Long-term patient satisfaction with respect to their facial appearance and scars after reconstructive surgery for skin cancer was comparable to short-term patient satisfaction, whereas Cancer Worry Scale and psychosocial distress appeared to be slightly higher. Our results can be used to better inform patients on the long-term effects of facial reconstructive surgery on patient satisfaction and quality of life, which are important to improve patient counselling, patient expectation management and shared decision-making.
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.