Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41907084›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026

Saying "Yes" to Saying "No": A Conceptual Framework for Setting Boundaries in Plastic Surgical Practice.

Rajiv Chandawarkar, Gregory Pearson, Aleksandra Krajewski, Sydney Ladas, Kathleen Roy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rajiv ChandawarkarFrom the Department of Plastic Surgery, The Ohio University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.
Gregory PearsonFrom the Department of Plastic Surgery, The Ohio University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.
Aleksandra KrajewskiDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Health Sciences Center, Stony Brook Medicine, Stony Brook, NY.
Sydney LadasMichigan State University, Grand Rapids, MI.
Kathleen RoyFrom the Department of Plastic Surgery, The Ohio University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In most clinical specialties, including plastic surgery, saying "no" to unnecessary, ill-timed, or simply frivolous referrals is discouraged and never taught. Carried forward into practice, this inability leads to overwhelming workloads, chaotic schedules, loss of professional autonomy, and exhaustion-well-known triggers for burnout. Providing communication tools to politely frame a refusal without jeopardizing professional relationships is essential. Methods: This narrative review provided a broad overview of existing literature on the topic across medical and nonmedical customer-service sectors, combined with the authors' own experience. It established a context for a comprehensive summary and used the available material to create vignette-based training modules for residents and junior attendings. Results: Specifically, the traditional teaching is to always say yes to all clinical consults, no matter what they are or how overworked one already is. In contrast, publications on physician-burnout strongly recommend setting boundaries, none of which teach physicians how to do so. Although communication skills are taught during training, specific skills for politely refusing referrals, especially if inappropriate or ill-timed, are lacking. Conclusions: Using the reviewed material and our experience, a rich source of teaching materials, including clinical vignettes, was created that can be used by program leaders and younger faculty to say "no," while maintaining honesty, professionalism, and positive referral relationships. Removing the stigma of self-guilt associated with saying "no" when appropriate, and doing so via clear and respectful communication, builds credibility, maintains professional autonomy, demonstrates integrity, and also ensures that patients receive the best possible care.

Identifiers

PMID41907084
PMCPMC13023695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.