Back

Predicting Patient-Reported Appearance Satisfaction After Facial Skin Cancer Reconstruction: Development and Internal Validation of a Multivariable Prediction Model

Ottenhof, M. M. J.

2026-04-03 surgery
10.64898/2026.04.01.26349978 medRxiv
Show abstract

Patient-reported outcomes have become standard in facial skin cancer surgery, yet clinicians currently lack validated tools to predict postoperative appearance satisfaction from preoperative patient characteristics. We developed and internally validated a prediction model for appearance satisfaction three months after facial skin cancer reconstruction. A prospective cohort study enrolled 287 patients at a tertiary referral center (2017-2018); 111 patients with complete data were included in the primary analysis. Patients completed the FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module preoperatively and at three months postoperatively. Our multivariable linear regression model incorporated age, sex, comorbidities, smoking status, and baseline appearance satisfaction. The model explained 23.0% of variance in postoperative appearance satisfaction (R2 = 0.23; adjusted R2 = 0.19; p < 0.001). Baseline appearance satisfaction (B = 0.48; 95% CI 0.28-0.68; p < 0.001) and female sex (B = -7.16; 95% CI -12.52 to -1.81; p = 0.009) emerged as independent predictors. Bootstrap resampling (500 iterations) yielded an optimism-corrected R2 of 0.17, supporting acceptable internal validity. Mean appearance satisfaction remained stable from baseline (54.8 +/- 13.8) to three months (57.0 +/- 16.4; p = 0.27). Baseline appearance satisfaction and female sex independently predict postoperative appearance satisfaction following facial skin cancer reconstruction. External validation in independent cohorts is warranted before clinical implementation.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 5%
23.7%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 5%
10.6%
3
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.9%
4
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
7.2%
50% of probability mass above
5
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
5.1%
6
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.5%
7
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.2%
8
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
9
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.9%
10
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
11
Translational Vision Science & Technology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
12
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
13
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.8%
14
Neuroscience
88 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.8%
15
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.8%
16
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
17
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.4%
18
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
19
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
20
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
21
Transfusion
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
22
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
23
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
25
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
26
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 48%
0.5%