ArticleJPRAS open2026
Patient preferences for scar orientation after gender-affirming mastectomy: A survey study.
Article in JPRAS open, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gender-affirming mastectomy (GAM) most commonly uses the double-incision technique, producing prominent transverse chest scars. Although effective, these scars are highly visible and may influence postoperative aesthetic satisfaction. Incision orientation is typically determined by the surgeon, yet little is known about which patterns patients find favorable. This study evaluated patient preferences for double incision orientations to inform preoperative discussions. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was distributed to individuals with a history of or considering GAM. Participants ranked connected and non-connected incision patterns from most to least aesthetically pleasing. Rankings were converted to weighted preference scores using the Borda count method. The Friedman test, with post hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Bonferroni correction, assessed preference differences. Results: 104 responses were analyzed. Participants were primarily 20-29 (49%) or 30-39 years old (28%), identified as transgender men (66%) or non-binary (31%), and mostly underwent GAM (85%). Friedman testing demonstrated significant differences among incision types ( Conclusions: Patients considering double-incision GAM show varied scar orientation preferences, with curved incisions following the natural pectoralis contour most favored. Discussing scar orientation may support more informed preoperative discussions and shared decision-making when multiple surgical options are feasible.
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.