ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
Prospective Evaluation of an Automated Rule-based Screening Tool for Body Dysmorphic Disorder in Aesthetic Surgery.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) is underdiagnosed in aesthetic surgery and poses significant risks for postoperative dissatisfaction and complications. Structured screening tools are required to improve early detection and guide surgical decision-making. This study evaluated the effectiveness of an automated, rule-based screening system incorporating the Body Dysmorphic Disorder Questionnaire (BDDQ) in a large cohort of patients undergoing cosmetic surgery. Methods: This prospective study enrolled 3722 adult patients who underwent elective cosmetic procedures between January 2021 and July 2024 in a solo plastic surgery practice. The patients completed an online dynamic questionnaire, including the BDDQ. A rule-based algorithm integrates BDDQ scores with clinical variables to flag BDD risk. Patients with positive screening results underwent psychological assessments before surgical eligibility was determined. Postoperative outcomes were assessed using a multidimensional satisfaction questionnaire that included a visual analog scale. Inter-rater reliability was calculated for the exclusion and satisfaction ratings. Results: Among the 3722 patients, 1080 (29.02%) tested positive for BDD. Only 8 BDD-positive patients underwent surgery after psychological evaluation, of whom 75% reported high satisfaction at follow-up (mean: 15.7 mo). Cohen κ indicated strong inter-rater agreement for BDD classification (κ = 0.86), exclusion decisions (κ = 0.81), and satisfaction (κ = 0.79). The prevalence aligns with the upper estimates in aesthetic surgery populations and reflects enhanced detection via structured screening. Conclusions: Automated rule-based BDD screening improves psychological risk detection and planning in aesthetic surgery. This approach supports early referral and may enhance patient safety and satisfaction. Therefore, multicenter validation is recommended.
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.