ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Gigantomastia: Advancing a Preference Score System to Enhance Care Quality and Life Standards.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study introduces a new Gigantomastia Preference Score (GPS) to prioritize surgical candidates based on clinical severity and quality of life impact.
methodsThis retrospective study applied the newly developed GPS to the existing surgery waiting list of 213 patients at our center. The GPS was developed from evidence-based clinical practice indicators and a thorough literature review, selecting nine variables. The GPS was then used to reorder the waiting list, and comparisons were made between the original and reordered lists.
resultsImplementation of the GPS significantly reordered the waiting list. The Spearman's Rank Correlation coefficient between the original and new rankings was 0.5679 (p-value = 1.38e-19), indicating a moderate to strong positive correlation. The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test yielded a statistic of 3485.0 (p-value = 8.44e-21), showing significant changes in patient positions. ANOVA results highlighted significant differences in BMI and largest breast weight across priority levels. Chi-Square tests revealed significant associations between priority levels and Trauma and Psychiatry reports.
conclusionsThe GPS significantly improved the prioritization of patients with gigantomastia by incorporating multiple clinically relevant factors. This led to a more equitable and informed ordering of the surgical waiting list, potentially improving patient outcomes and optimizing healthcare resource allocation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
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.