Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39623227›Full record

ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2025

From Data to Recommendations: A Comprehensive Review of Ten Bibliometric Papers in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

Waseem Hassan, Siddig Ibrahim Abdelwahab, Manal Mohamed Elhassan Taha, Abdullah Farasani, Ahmed Ali Jerah, Saleh M Abdullah, Ieman A Aljahdali, Bassem Oraibi, Hassan Ahmad Alfaifi, Amal Hamdan Alzahrani and 2 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Waseem HassanInstitute of Chemical Sciences, University of Peshawar, Peshawar, 25120, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. waseem_anw@yahoo.com.
Siddig Ibrahim AbdelwahabMedical Research Center, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Manal Mohamed Elhassan TahaMedical Research Center, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah FarasaniDepartment of Medical Laboratory Technology, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed Ali JerahDepartment of Medical Laboratory Technology, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Saleh M AbdullahDepartment of Medical Laboratory Technology, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Ieman A AljahdaliDepartment of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, Taif university, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Bassem OraibiHealth Research Center, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Hassan Ahmad AlfaifiPharmaceutical Care Administration (Jeddah Second Health Cluster), Ministry of Health, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Amal Hamdan AlzahraniDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Omar OraibiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Yasir BabikerDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study provides a comprehensive analysis of ten papers published in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, focusing on the identification of critical gaps and the integration of diverse analytical approaches. Through a detailed review, we observed missing indicators such as comprehensive bibliometric metrics and qualitative assessments of research impact. The findings underscore the need for a more balanced approach in future studies, combining quantitative bibliometric data with qualitative evaluations to provide a fuller understanding of the research landscape. Our analysis highlights the importance of integrating systematic reviews and meta-analyses to achieve a holistic view of the subject matter. By adopting diverse indicators and methodologies, researchers can better capture the multifaceted nature of the field, including the impact on patient care and treatment outcomes. We emphasize the necessity for authors and reviewers to clearly understand and define the main theme and objectives of their studies, avoiding potential confusion that may arise from mixing different analytical methods. Incorporating these recommendations will enhance the clarity and effectiveness of research in aesthetic plastic surgery, bridging the gap between academic metrics and practical applications. This approach aims to foster more informed advancements in the field, ultimately contributing to improved patient outcomes and a deeper understanding of aesthetic practices.No Level Assigned This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. 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

BibliometricsPlastic Surgery ProceduresSurgery, PlasticEvidence-Based MedicineHumansAesthetic plastic surgeryBibliometric analysisScopusSuggestions

Identifiers

PMID39623227

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.