ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2026
Identification of Board-Certified Plastic Surgeons Using Artificial Intelligence: An Accuracy Assessment.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 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
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models like ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA) and Gemini (Google, Mountain View, CA), is increasingly used in healthcare for diagnosis, education, and research. Because interest in cosmetic procedures rises, patients face growing difficulty in selecting qualified providers because of unclear credentials and expanding practitioner types. Objectives: This study evaluates whether AI can help patients accurately identify board-certified plastic surgeons, addressing a current gap in the literature. Methods: Four leading AI tools-ChatGPT, Perplexity (Perplexity AI, San Francisco, CA), Gemini, and Claude (Anthropic, San Francisco, CA)-were evaluated by asking each to name board-certified plastic surgeons across all 50 US states. Results were verified through independent internet searches and the American Board of Plastic Surgery to confirm certification status. Statistical analysis using GraphPad Prism (Boston, MA) found differences between tools, with significance set at Results: Across 1000 results, overall accuracy in identifying plastic surgeons was 94.1%, with Gemini performing best, followed by Perplexity, ChatGPT, and Claude, with statistically significant differences. Most nonplastic surgeons were otolaryngologists and general surgeons, with no difference between AI models in error type distribution. Gemini scored the highest in regards to board certification accuracy, showing significant differences compared with the other models. Conclusions: Because the field of aesthetic procedures grows and more providers enter the market, patients must be able to make well-informed choices when selecting a practitioner. Although AI offers a promising tool for identifying board-certified plastic surgeons, its potential for error means patients should independently verify the information. Level of Evidence 5 Therapeutic:
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.