ArticleBMJ open2025
Content validity of self-reports of excess skin after bariatric surgery: protocol for a Dutch cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBody contouring surgery (BCS) can be applied to reduce the physical and mental burden of excess skin after massive weight loss. Self-reported outcomes of patients are used to assess this burden and to evaluate the effectiveness of BCS. The aim of this study is to clarify what is reflected in self-reports of excess skin after bariatric surgery. We hypothesise that the self-reported burden of excess skin is associated with both objectively assessed excess skin and the disposition to experience negative emotions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This cross-sectional study will include 68 outpatients presenting at a plastic surgery clinic with a request for BCS. Patients fill out two questionnaires (the BODY-Q and the Sahlgrenska Excess Skin Questionnaire (SESQ)) to measure the size and burden of excess skin as well as the Big Five Inventory (BFI) to measure the disposition towards negative emotionality. Anonymised photographs of excess skin will be rated independently by four plastic surgeons using the Pittsburgh Rating Scale (PRS) Rainbow Classification to establish the objective amount of excess skin. Multiple linear regression analyses will be performed to identify the association of BODY-Q and SESQ scores with objective appraisals of excess skin by plastic surgeons, negative emotionality and demographics. Interobserver agreement for PRS Rainbow Classification will be established by Fleiss' kappa. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the regional medical ethics committee (METC; W20.258) and the institutional review board (Lokale Toetsing, St. Antonius Hospital in Nieuwegein, no. Z23.035). Informed consent of participants will be obtained. The results of this study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
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.