Plastic Surgery Improves Baseline Anxiety in Males Having Lesions on Face
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Congenital and acquired lesions both cause marked elevation in anxiety due to decreased self-esteem and confidence. Plastic surgery can address and markedly improve the anxiety level by addressing such lesions. Medical and surgical concerns related to body may elevate baseline anxiety. Although females are more concerned and fretful about such lesions, we observed that males are also prone to similar levels of anxiety. Objective: The objective of the study is to find out effect of plastic surgery on anxiety level of males having facial lesions. Methods: This prospective study was conducted in Plastic Surgery Department of King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Pakistan from Feb 2018 to Jan 2019 and 100 male patients with either congenital or acquired lesions of face were enrolled and operated. Anxiety level was rated by applying Hamilton anxiety scale immediate preoperatively and satisfaction along with quality of scar was noted after 2 months. Results: 53% of enrolled patients were having educational status above secondary school, 63% patients were from urban, 56% patients were below 27 years of age, 44% were above 27 years of age and 33% were married. Trauma was the cause of lesion in 61% while 13% were with Rhomberg disease and 26% with congenital lesions disorder. Majority of patients had lesion involving forehead. On Hamilton anxiety scale, pre-operative anxiety score was high (21.76±5.846) as compared to postoperative score (10.04±4.537). Scar scoring with Vancouver Scar Scale was 4.36±1.798 post operatively. Majority of patients showed significant improvement in anxiety scores post operatively. Conclusion: Irrespective of age, socioeconomic status and education level, lesions involving face elevated baseline anxiety in males. Plastic surgery addresses these concerns permanently resulting in marked improvement in anxiety level.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".