Satisfaction following Unilateral Breast Reconstruction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare patient satisfaction following unilateral pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) and free abdominal flap reconstruction. METHODS: Patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction using pedicled TRAM or free abdominal flaps (muscle-sparing TRAM or deep inferior epigastric perforator flap) and completed the BREAST-Q were identified from 2 prospectively maintained databases. BREAST-Q scores were assessed and compared for Satisfaction with Breasts, Outcome, and Physical Well-being Chest/Abdomen. RESULTS: Of the 138 patients who completed the BREAST-Q, 84 underwent pedicled TRAM flap reconstruction and 54 underwent free abdominal flap reconstruction. Overall, pedicled TRAM flap patients scored higher than free abdominal flap patients on all 4 BREAST-Q scales. This difference reached statistical significance in Satisfaction with Breasts (+7.74; P = 0.02). Similar results were found among patients who completed the BREAST-Q at <3 years postoperation. However, among patients at ≥3 years postoperation, there were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups, with the pedicled flap cohort scoring higher in Satisfaction with Breasts and Physical Well-being Chest and the free abdominal flap cohort scoring higher in Satisfaction with Outcome and Physical Well-being Abdomen scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent unilateral pedicled TRAM flap reconstruction experienced greater initial breast satisfaction than patients who underwent unilateral free abdominal flap reconstruction, but satisfaction equalized between the two over time, suggesting that long-term satisfaction may be equivalent between the 2 methods of reconstruction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it