Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40425883›Full record

ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025

Evaluating Surgical Results in Breast Cancer with Artificial Intelligence.

Nitzan Kenig, Javier Monton Echeverria, Aina Muntaner Vives

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors.

Nitzan KenigDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Quironsalud Palmaplanas, Cami dels Reis 308, 03010, Palma, Balearic Islands, Spain. nitzan.kenig@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-8914-5438
Javier Monton EcheverriaUniversity of Castilla-La Mancha, Albacete, Spain.
Aina Muntaner VivesDepartment of Otolaryngology, Son Llatzer Hospital, Palma, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionArtificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming healthcare, with increasing applications in surgical evaluation. In breast cancer surgery, achieving aesthetic symmetry is essential for patient satisfaction and emotional well-being. While human evaluation remains fundamental, AI-driven symmetry assessment promises objective alternatives. This study evaluates the performance of publicly available AI models in breast symmetry assessment and compares them with Pyolo8, a custom AI model developed by the authors. Additionally, the study explores the potential emotional impact and ethical considerations of AI-generated assessments in postoperative breast cancer patients.

methodsSixty-eight patients who underwent breast reconstruction were evaluated with the use of publicly available AI models and contrasted with an AI model developed by the authors named Pyolo8. All results were evaluated by human observers.

resultsChatGPT 4o and Pyolo8 AI models showed statistically significant moderate to strong positive correlation for postoperative assessment when compared to human observers. Direct interaction between AI models and patients was censored due to concerns of misinterpretation.

conclusionsBoth ChatGPT and Pyolo8 showed moderate to strong correlation with humans, but ChatGPT demonstrated superior communication skills. However, AI systems may lack the subtlety and empathy required for direct patient interactions, as vulnerable postoperative patients receiving an AI-generated symmetry assessment without appropriate clinical context may experience emotional distress or misinterpret the results. Human oversight and empathetic communication remain essential to ensure quality care while AI is increasingly integrated into medicine. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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

Artificial IntelligenceBreast NeoplasmsMammaplastyMastectomyPatient SatisfactionAdultAgedEstheticsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeArtificial intelligenceBreast cancerBreast surgeryHuman–machine interactionPatient–doctor relationship

Identifiers

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.