ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Toward Objective Grading of Reconstructed Breast Aesthetics: Three-dimensional Geometric and Color Features Associated with Interrater Variance.
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. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Interrater variance in subjective grading of reconstructed breast aesthetics limits the assessment reliability and reduces the quality of training datasets for machine learning models designed for objective, image-based grading. This study aims to identify the 3-dimensional (3D) features associated with such variability across 8 aesthetic viewpoints commonly used in Japan by analyzing case pairs in which expert scoring and pairwise comparisons show disagreement. Methods: Two-dimensional (2D) and 3D images of the reconstructed breasts were obtained from 174 patients. Aesthetic outcomes were independently scored by expert raters using 2D images, and pairwise comparisons were conducted for 154 selected pairs. Several 3D geometric and color features were extracted from the 3D images; their correlation with expert scores was examined; and Results: Disagreement pairs were found irrespective of expert score differences. However, these pairs showed larger differences in the coefficient of variation between the winner and loser cases. For all the viewpoints, several 3D features revealed significant differences in their average values between agreement and disagreement pairs. These disagreement-specific features varied in both type and number across viewpoints and were different from the score-correlated features. Conclusions: Viewpoint-specific 3D features associated with interrater variance were identified. This highlights a potential limitation of training machine learning models solely on expert scoring and suggests that integrating these 3D features may help inform future model design.
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.