ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Assessing the Effectiveness of a Short Form Screening Tool (COPs) for Body Dysmorphic Disorder in Cosmetic Surgery Patients: A Study of Pre- and Post-Operative Outcomes.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent regulatory changes in Australian cosmetic surgery necessitate preoperative screening for body dysmorphic disorder (BDD). This study, which focuses on patient outcomes, evaluates the COPs tool's efficacy and examines its implications on patients undergoing cosmetic procedures. A total of 189 patients were included: 78 underwent Medicare-classified "cosmetic" surgeries, and 111 underwent "medically necessary" procedures. Patients completed the COPs assessment pre- and post-operatively, with a score >40 indicating BDD susceptibility. Results show no significant pre- to post-operative change in COPs scores across different surgical procedures (body, breast, facial, and mixed) in both "cosmetic" (p = 0.2-0.4) and "itemised" groups (p = 0.15-0.33). However, overall, there was a marked reduction in COPs scores post-operatively (p < 0.001), indicating improved self-perception. Specifically, 91% of patients initially BDD-prone showed scores < 40 post-operatively. Conversely, 3.8% of initially low-scoring patients developed BDD-prone scores post-operatively. Comparison between cosmetic and itemised groups revealed higher preoperative COPs scores in the itemised group (p = 0.006), though post-operative scores did not differ significantly (p = 0.33). Incidences of post-operative BDD-prone scores or scores < 40 did not differ between groups (p = 0.61). Complication rates and the need for revision surgery were similar between groups. These findings suggest two plausible interpretations: First, preoperative screening with the COPs tool may positively influence self-perception related to BDD among cosmetic surgery patients, potentially serving as a therapeutic adjunct for those at risk. Second, while screening tools are beneficial, they may have limitations in predicting post-operative outcomes related to BDD development. Further research should explore these dynamics to refine screening practices and optimise patient outcomes in cosmetic surgery contexts. Level of Evidence III This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
39470820What 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.