Scholarlink

Background <p>Since the emergence of the Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT), artificial intelligence (AI) has change how medical information is accessed, processed, and utilized. However, its use in clinical environments, particularly in plastic surgery, poses ethical, medical, and safety challenges, especially when it is employed to generate aesthetic recommendations without appropriate professional supervision.</p> Methods <p>A descriptive analysis was conducted using standardized medical photographs of 20 female patients under 50 years of age from the author’s clinical database. Frontal projection images (thorax and abdomen) were uploaded to the ChatGPT-4 platform with the prompt: “What physical changes do you suggest?” and subsequently evaluated by board-certified plastic surgeons. The objective was to compare AI-generated recommendations with those provided by human specialists and to analyze the risks associated with using algorithms to validate or reinforce aesthetic standards.</p> Results <p>In 18 of the 20 patients (90%), the AI suggested at least one surgical procedure, most commonly mastopexy (55%), classic abdominoplasty (55%), and liposculpture (20%). Combined breast and abdominal procedures were recommended in 15 cases (75%), whereas only 2 patients (10%) were advised to maintain their current physical condition. Overall similarity between AI and human recommendations was low (mean Jaccard index 0.1–0.2), with wide interpatient variability. Additionally, AI tended to recommend an equal or greater number of procedures compared with surgeons (median − 1, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p> Conclusion <p>Although artificial intelligence represents a promising tool in medicine, AI tends to over-recommend aesthetic procedures without considering the reason for consultation, timing, or patient comorbidities. Its indiscriminate use in the aesthetic domain may contribute to reinforcing distorted perceptions of body image. Lacking clinical judgment, empathy, and sociocultural context, the application of AI in plastic surgery must be carefully regulated and guided by ethical principles.</p> Level of Evidence IV <p>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 <a href="http://www.springer.com/00266">www.springer.com/00266</a>.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Can Artificial Intelligence Replicate Clinical Judgment in Aesthetic Surgery? A Comparison of ChatGPT and Plastic Surgeons’ Recommendations

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月5日

查看全文
  • Tomás González,
  • Stefan Danilla,
  • Rocío Las Heras,
  • Susana Benítez,
  • Claudia Albornoz,
  • Ruth Konhenkampf,
  • Carlos Domínguez

摘要

Background

Since the emergence of the Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT), artificial intelligence (AI) has change how medical information is accessed, processed, and utilized. However, its use in clinical environments, particularly in plastic surgery, poses ethical, medical, and safety challenges, especially when it is employed to generate aesthetic recommendations without appropriate professional supervision.

Methods

A descriptive analysis was conducted using standardized medical photographs of 20 female patients under 50 years of age from the author’s clinical database. Frontal projection images (thorax and abdomen) were uploaded to the ChatGPT-4 platform with the prompt: “What physical changes do you suggest?” and subsequently evaluated by board-certified plastic surgeons. The objective was to compare AI-generated recommendations with those provided by human specialists and to analyze the risks associated with using algorithms to validate or reinforce aesthetic standards.

Results

In 18 of the 20 patients (90%), the AI suggested at least one surgical procedure, most commonly mastopexy (55%), classic abdominoplasty (55%), and liposculpture (20%). Combined breast and abdominal procedures were recommended in 15 cases (75%), whereas only 2 patients (10%) were advised to maintain their current physical condition. Overall similarity between AI and human recommendations was low (mean Jaccard index 0.1–0.2), with wide interpatient variability. Additionally, AI tended to recommend an equal or greater number of procedures compared with surgeons (median − 1, p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Although artificial intelligence represents a promising tool in medicine, AI tends to over-recommend aesthetic procedures without considering the reason for consultation, timing, or patient comorbidities. Its indiscriminate use in the aesthetic domain may contribute to reinforcing distorted perceptions of body image. Lacking clinical judgment, empathy, and sociocultural context, the application of AI in plastic surgery must be carefully regulated and guided by ethical principles.

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.