MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599877422 · doi:10.5353/th_b5805064

A systematic review of the psychological outcome of patient who has undergone the cosmetic breast augmentation

2016· review· en· W2599877422 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jing Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBody Image and Dysmorphia Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast augmentationOutcome (game theory)MedicinePsychologyPsychotherapistSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cosmetic breast augmentation is one of the most popular cosmetic surgeries at present. Although there were some studies evaluated the psychological aspects of this kind of surgery, the psychological characteristics of these patients are not clear. And the psychological outcome of this type of surgery is a critical issue. 
\nObjective: This systematic review is to explore whether there is a positive correlation between cosmetic breast augmentation and self-esteem and lower depression rate and whether there is a positive change in quality of life on the basis of positive change in psychological outcome after receiving cosmetic breast augmentation. 
\nMethods: Search of relevant literature was performed in PubMed, China Journal Net, Wan Fang Database to find out every journal article evaluating the psychological outcome of cosmetic breast augmentation surgery up to April 2014. Quality assessment criteria were based on Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. 
\nResult: Seven studies were included in this review. 5 were prospective studies, 1 was cross-sectional studies and 1 was cohort study. Participants were recruited from cosmetic surgical centers, clinics or hospitals. All the participants were voluntary to participate in interview-based or self-reported questionnaires. Questionnaires were the main measurement tools for the dependent variable. The self-reported data was objective and inaccuracies. Because of the nature of observational study, confounding existed. The positive outcomes are found in 6 studies. Two studies have proved breast augmentation has a direct positive impact on self-esteem and sexuality, which has statistical significant difference. The depression rate before and after the cosmetic breast augmentation was lack of evidence to make analysis. Self-confidence and quality of life are reported improved after this surgery. 
\nConclusion: There is probable beneficial psychological outcome of cosmetic breast augmentation and improvement in quality of life, especially self-esteem and sexuality. Another psychological outcome, self-confidence, was also found positive change postoperatively. The present evidence in included studies is not enough to support a lower depression rate after surgery.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBody Image and Dysmorphia StudiesFrench-language works237,207