Crowdsourcing the Public's Perception and Systematic Review of Nipple Inversion and Its Repair

Stone, Gregory O.; Shauly, Orr; Gould, Daniel J.

doi:10.1089/jwh.2020.8953

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Forty-five articles were ultimately included for data extraction (Table 1). 13–57 Proportionate rater agreement was 91.7% for abstract screening and 92.5% for full-text screening. The Cohen kappa coefficient for interrater reliability was 0.82 for abstract screening and 0.81 for full-text screening, demonstrating sufficient interrater reliability.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crowdsourcing in Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery: A Systematic Review with Reporting Recommendations

Villavisanis

Blum

Cheung

et al. 2023

Plastic &Amp; Reconstructive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Crowdsourcing uses online platforms to collect large data from laypersons and has been increasingly used over the past 5 years to answer questions about aesthetic and functional outcomes following plastic and reconstructive surgery. This systematic review evaluates crowdsourcing articles in plastic and reconstructive surgery based on study topic, participants, and effect size in the hopes of describing best practices. Methods: A systematic search strategy was developed with a licensed librarian and attending plastic surgeon to query all articles using crowdsourcing in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Covidence systematic review manager was used by two independent reviewers to import articles, screen abstracts, evaluate full texts, and extract data. Results: A search run on October 8, 2021, yielded 168 studies, of which 45 were ultimately included. Craniofacial surgery and aesthetic surgery collectively constituted over half of studies. Participants in plastic surgery crowdsourcing studies are more commonly from the United States, female, straight, 25 to 35 years old; have completed college; and earn $20,000 to $50,000 per year. Studies typically assessed aesthetic perceptions, cost approximately $350, ran a median of 9 days, included approximately 60 unique survey items, and included approximately 40 unique human images. Conclusions: Crowdsourcing is a relatively new, low-cost method of garnering high-volume data from laypersons that may further our understanding of public perception in plastic and reconstructive surgery. As with other nascent fields, there is significant variability in number of subjects used, subject compensation, and methodology, indicating an opportunity for quality improvement.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crowdsourcing in Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery: A Systematic Review with Reporting Recommendations

Villavisanis

Blum

Cheung

et al. 2023

Plastic &Amp; Reconstructive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evaluating acute nipple inversion, imaging findings and outcomes

Hatcher,

Leon,

Cornell

et al. 2024

Clinical Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breastfeeding Outcome and Complications in Females With Breast Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Chen

Zhu

Huynh

et al. 2023

Aesthetic Surgery Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Breast augmentation is a commonly performed cosmetic procedure. We set out to determine whether there is any effect on breastfeeding in women after breast implants. Objectives The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current evidence on breastfeeding outcome and complications in women with breast augmentation. Methods A systematic review was performed in MEDLINE (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD), EMBASE (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), and all evidence-based medicine reviews from their respective inception dates to November 7th, 2022, to assess outcomes of breastfeeding in women with breast implants (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022357909). This review is in accordance with both the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results Eleven studies (4 prospective and 7 retrospective) in total were included in the review. A total of 8197 out of 9965 (82.25%) patients were successfully able to breastfeed after breast implants. Of five studies that included a control group, 343,793 of 388,695 (88.45%) successfully breastfed. A meta-analysis of 5 comparative studies showed a significant reduction of breastfeeding in women with breast implants, n=393,686, pooled odds ratio = 0.45, 95% confidence interval [0.38,0.53]. Complications described included pain, mastitis, insufficient or excessive lactation, and nipple inversion. Conclusions There may be impairment in ability to breastfeed for women who receive breast implants compared to those without. Additional studies on the topic are needed to further clarify the relationship.

show abstract

Crowdsourcing the Public's Perception and Systematic Review of Nipple Inversion and Its Repair

Cited by 6 publications

References 52 publications

Crowdsourcing in Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery: A Systematic Review with Reporting Recommendations

Crowdsourcing in Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery: A Systematic Review with Reporting Recommendations

Evaluating acute nipple inversion, imaging findings and outcomes

Breastfeeding Outcome and Complications in Females With Breast Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About