ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2026
Development and Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Female Genital Labia Procedures: The LABIA-Q.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 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.
- Efficacy and Safety of Hyaluronic Acid Injection for Labia Majora Atrophy in the Chinese Population.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Demand for interventions to improve the appearance, function, or feel of labia has grown, highlighting the need for a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). Objectives: The aim of this study was to develop the LABIA-Q for use in ciswomen by following international PROM development guidelines. Methods: Step 1 involved concept elicitation interviews with women treated at a US outpatient clinic to improve labial appearance, function, or feel, which informed the conceptual framework and preliminary scales. In Step 2, content validity was established and scales refined through cognitive debriefing with patients and clinician input. Step 3 involved field testing with 2 cohorts: an online sample from Prolific and clinical samples from 9 outpatient clinics across the USA and Canada. Item reduction was conducted using the Rasch measurement theory (RMT), along with assessments of test-retest reliability and construct validity. Results: Twelve qualitative interviews informed the conceptual framework. Cognitive interviews ( Conclusions: The LABIA-Q is a valid and reliable PROM for evaluating outcomes of labial interventions across research, clinical practice, quality improvement, and regulatory contexts.
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.