ArticleMedicine and pharmacy reports2026
Quality of life in patients with craniofacial anomalies: personal experience and review of literature.
Article in Medicine and pharmacy reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Experiences of family caregivers regarding the health of children with congenital craniofacial anomalies in Colombia.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Craniofacial anomalies, particularly cleft lip and palate affecting 1 in 500 to 1 in 2,500 live births globally, exert profound influences on physical function, psychological well-being, and social integration throughout the entire life. While surgical advances have improved outcomes, the long-term impact on the quality of life remains incompletely understood, necessitating comprehensive evaluation of psychosocial outcomes following primary surgical repair. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional comparative study evaluating 85 pediatric patients aged 4-7 years with surgically repaired non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate and their caregivers, compared to 90 age-matched healthy controls. All patients underwent standardized surgical repair with minimum 24-month postoperative follow-up. Quality of life was assessed using the validated KINDL questionnaire administered to both children and parents, measuring physical well-being, emotional well-being, self-esteem, family relationships, friendships, and school functioning. Statistical analysis employed independent-samples t-tests and chi-square tests with significance set at p < 0.05. Results: Children with cleft conditions demonstrated overall quality of life scores comparable to healthy controls (82.15 ± 14.72 vs 83.78 ± 16.72, respectively; 1.9% difference, not statistically significant). However, self-esteem scores were significantly lower in the cleft group (78.17 ± 24.79 vs 83.49 ± 22.17, p = 0.036). Parental assessments yielded high overall scores (80.38 ± 12.41) but identified significant concerns in self-esteem (72.41 ± 16.82) and infirmity perception (72.15 ± 17.67) (both p < 0.01). Age-stratified analysis revealed that children requiring reinterventions and older children (6-7 years) demonstrated greater family-related quality of life concerns. Conclusions: While children with surgically repaired cleft lip and/or palate achieve overall quality of life outcomes comparable to healthy peers, persistent self-esteem deficits indicate ongoing psychosocial challenges requiring comprehensive multidisciplinary intervention. These findings emphasize the need for holistic care approaches that integrate psychological support, targeted therapies, and family counseling to optimize both functional and psychosocial outcomes beyond primary surgical repair.
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.