ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2022
The Impact of Senior Author Profile on Publication Level of Evidence in
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research Requirements for Residency Applicants Need to Be Reconsidered.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2026Article
- Cross-race vs. same-race collaboration in plastic surgery: AI-driven analysis of research and race-interaction dynamics.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Predicting the Future of Aesthetic Surgery: An Artificial Intelligence Framework for Global Publication Forecasting.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2026Observational
- AI-assisted forecasting in microsurgery: A dual-component framework for global publication trends.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methods: All accepted publications by American senior authors to Results: A total of 1030 articles were screened' of which 266 (25.8%) were eligible for LOE classification with the following distribution: I, 0.8%; II, 14.3%; III, 45.1%; IV, 33.1%; and V, 7.1%. Senior author demographic factors, including gender and race/ethnicity, did not significantly impact LOE ( Conclusions: Most publications in
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.