Risk Factors Associated with Severe Macromastia among Adolescents and Young Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Macromastia is common among adolescents and young women and has well-documented negative physical and psychosocial effects. The pathogenesis of idiopathic macromastia has been attributed to increased end organ sensitivity to circulating gonadal hormones. Despite the known negative effects of macromastia, there is a paucity of literature examining the clinical risk factors associated with macromastia severity in this age group. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, standardized clinical forms were administered to patients between the ages of 12 and 21 years undergoing reduction mammaplasty. Data were collected pertaining to patient demographics, biometrics, breast symptoms, medical and family history, and breast tissue resection mass at the time of reduction. Resection mass was normalized to patient body surface area in analyses. RESULTS: A total of 375 patients were included in analyses. Mean age at surgery was 18.1 years. The following risk factors were positively associated with macromastia severity in both univariate and multivariate logistic regression models: overweight or obesity, racial or ethnic minority status, patient-reported gynecologic or endocrine complaints, and early menarche ( p < 0.05, all). More severe cases of macromastia were associated with approximately three times the odds of being overweight or obese or achieving menarche before 11 years old. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample, overweight or obesity, racial or ethnic minority status, early menarche, and patient-reported gynecologic or endocrine complaints were all positively associated with macromastia severity. Awareness of these factors can empower physicians to identify and address modifiable risk factors to prevent progression to more severe disease. Macromastia itself should prompt screening for gynecologic or endocrine complaints with referral as indicated. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".