ArticleJPRAS open2026
Public perception of facial vascularized composite allotransplants-insights from a cross-sectional survey of healthy individuals in the USA.
Article in JPRAS open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of treatment strategies to combat acute and chronic rejection episodes in vascularized composite allotransplantation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Facial vascularized composite allotransplantation (fVCA) is an advanced reconstructive procedure for extensive facial defects. While clinical outcomes have improved, public perceptions remain underexplored. Gaining insights into societal attitudes is crucial for patient education, informed decision-making, and guiding future research. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 100 volunteers from the United States via the Prolific platform. The study population reflected the demographic distribution of the general population. The survey assessed awareness, willingness to undergo fVCA, decision-making factors, and ethical concerns. Responses were collected through Likert scales, multiple-choice questions, and aesthetic evaluations of post-transplant outcomes. Results: Fifty-eight percent of participants had never heard of fVCA, with social media being the most common source of information (50 %) for those who had. Eighty-seven percent were potentially open to undergoing fVCA in case of an accident, although concerns about graft rejection risks (65 %) and lifelong immunosuppression (65 %) influenced decision-making. Functionality was prioritized over aesthetics by 51 % of respondents, yet 72 % preferred donor-recipient matching based on age, gender, and ethnicity. Psychological adaptation was a major concern for 51 %, with 82 % emphasizing the importance of pre- and postoperative psychological counseling. Ethical concerns included donor consent (61 %) and fairness in allocation (69 %). Respondents rated photographs of postoperative aesthetic outcomes with a mean score of 7.9 out of 10. Conclusion: While public perception of fVCA is generally positive, concerns regarding rejection, immunosuppression, and psychological adaptation remain significant. Increased education, ethical transparency, and advancements in immunosuppressive strategies are needed to enhance acceptance and feasibility. Future research should explore novel immunosuppressants and psychological programs to improve long-term concerns.
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.