ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
AI-Generated Clinical Images of Head-and-Neck Lesions in Plastic Surgery Education: An Expert Evaluation.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Large language models' performance in answering common patient questions about colonoscopy: an expert-based evaluation.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical images are essential in plastic and reconstructive surgery education, particularly for understanding pathology, planning reconstructions, and preparing for board examinations. However, the use of real patient photographs raises ethical concerns related to privacy, confidentiality, and informed consent, especially in head-and-neck conditions, where anonymization is challenging. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have enabled text-to-image generation, offering a potential alternative to real patient images for educational use.
methodsThis cross-sectional evaluation study assessed the ability of modern AI image generation applications to produce clinically accurate and realistic images of head-and-neck conditions based solely on standardized written case scenarios. Expert consultants developed examination-style clinical scenarios representing common benign and malignant head-and-neck conditions, intentionally omitting the diagnoses section. Scenarios were entered verbatim into three AI platforms: ChatGPT (DALL·E 3), Midjourney, and Google Gemini 3 (Nano Banana Pro). One image per scenario and platform was generated without prompt refinement. The images were anonymized, randomized, and evaluated by plastic surgeons using a structured 5-point Likert questionnaire assessing fidelity, realism, completeness, errors or hallucinations, and educational usefulness. Non-parametric statistical analyses were performed.
resultsAll AI models demonstrated the ability to generate clinically plausible images. No significant differences were observed between the models for basal cell carcinoma. For melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, melanocytic nevus, and neurofibromatosis, Gemini achieved higher overall scores and outperformed other models in several clinically relevant domains, particularly surface texture accuracy, representation of key features, and overall clinical accuracy.
conclusionAI-generated images derived from written clinical scenarios can produce realistic and educationally valuable visual representations of head-and-neck conditions. Such images may serve as a feasible and ethical alternative to real patient photographs in surgical education, with variability in performance observed across AI platforms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: 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
41986550What 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.