Delivering Breast Reconstruction Information to Patients: Women Report on Preferred Information Delivery Styles and Options
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
PURPOSE: To discover missed opportunities for providing information to women undergoing breast reconstruction in an effort to decrease regret and improve patient education, teaching modalities, and satisfaction. METHOD: Thirty- to 45-minute semi-structured interviews were conducted exploring patient experiences with information provision on breast reconstruction. Purposeful sampling was used to include women with a variety of reconstruction types at different time points along their recovery. Using grounded theory methodology, 2 independent reviewers analyzed the transcripts and generated thematic codes based on patient responses. BREAST-Q scores were also collected to compare satisfaction scores with qualitative responses. RESULTS: Patients were interested in a wide variety of topics related to breast reconstruction including the pros and cons of different options, nipple-sparing mastectomies, immediate breast reconstruction, oncological safety/monitoring and the impact of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, secondary procedures (balancing, nipple reconstruction), post-operative recovery, and long-term expectations. Patients valued accessing information from multiple sources, seeing numerous photographs, being guided to reliable information online, and having access to a frequently asked questions file or document. Information delivery via interaction with medical personnel and previously reconstructed patients was most appreciated. Compared with BREAST-Q scores for satisfaction with the plastic surgeon (mean: 95.7, range: 60-100), informational satisfaction scores were lower at 74.7 (50-100), confirming the informational gaps expressed by interviewees. CONCLUSIONS: Women having recently undergone breast reconstruction reported key deficiencies in information provided prior to surgery and identified preferred information delivery options. Addressing women's educational needs is important to achieve appropriate expectations and improve satisfaction.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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