ArticleBMC primary care2026
Family physician involvement in aesthetic medicine in British Columbia: a cross sectional environmental scan.
Article in BMC primary care, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAesthetic medicine is a rapidly expanding area of practice that operates outside the publicly funded healthcare system in Canada. As a result, physician involvement in this sector is not captured in administrative data sets and the extent of family physician participation remains poorly characterized. We conducted an environmental scan of the publicly observable footprint of aesthetic medicine in British Columbia (BC), including clinics advertising minimally invasive procedures, and the physicians publicly associated with them with specific attention to the representation of family physicians.
methodsClinics were identified using Allergan Canada’s public clinic locator and supplemented with an independent Google search. Clinics offering onabotulinumtoxin A and hyaluronic acid dermal fillers were included. Physicians affiliated with included clinics were verified through the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia (CPSBC) registry. Descriptive analyses were performed to characterize clinics and physicians including specialty distribution, training background, and clinic staffing.
resultsA total of 171 clinics and 299 physicians were identified. Family physicians represented the largest specialty group (192/299, 64.2%), followed by dermatology (13.7%) and plastic surgery (10.0%). Most providers were Canadian trained (67.6%), and gender distribution was balanced (53.5% male, 46.5% female). Forty-eight physicians (16.1%) reported additional training, and nine practiced across multiple sites. Clinics were concentrated in the Mainland/Southwest region (62.0%), with over half employing allied health professionals, most commonly registered nurses. Ownership information was reported for 21.0% of clinics, and documentation of prescriber oversight was inconsistent.
conclusionThis study provides a conservative estimate of aesthetic medicine activity in BC and identifies family medicine as the most represented specialty among publicly listed providers. These findings highlight the need for more comprehensive data on privately paid medical services to better understand practice models and how aesthetic medicine fits within Canada’s evolving primary care landscape.
Indexed as
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.