The Artificial Intelligence application in Aesthetic Medicine: How ChatGPT can Revolutionize the Aesthetic World
Abstract
Aesthetic medicine is witnessing a growing importance of ChatGPT and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, as highlighted by the pioneering work of Xie et al. in their article, "Aesthetic Surgery Advice and Counseling from Artificial Intelligence: A Rhinoplasty Consultation with ChatGPT." These advancements promise to revolutionize patient consultations, treatment planning, and follow-up care. AI-driven chatbots, such as ChatGPT, can enhance patient consultations by providing accurate and reliable information on aesthetic procedures, their risks, benefits, and potential outcomes, enabling well-informed decisions and improved treatment outcomes. Furthermore, AI can personalize treatment plans by analyzing patient data, leading to increased precision and satisfaction. AI-powered platforms can also streamline patient follow-up and monitoring, improving patient outcomes and resource utilization, while serving as a valuable educational tool for clinicians. Despite these benefits, AI integration in aesthetic medicine raises concerns about data privacy, security, and potential biases in AI algorithms. To address these challenges, the aesthetic medicine community must establish ethical guidelines, adopt stringent security protocols, and ensure diverse and representative datasets for AI training. Additionally, maintaining the personal connection between patients and providers is crucial for preserving the human touch in patient care.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 https://www.springer.com/00266 .
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is a noticeable demand for ethical guidelines in the literature surrounding healthcare applications of LLMs.
“Consequently, there is a noticeable demand for ethical guidelines, as evidenced within the literature surrounding healthcare applications of LLMs46,60,64,70,71,74,75,78.”
From The ethics of ChatGPT in medicine and healthcare: a systematic review on large language models (LLMs) (2024) · cites this paper as [60]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 6 · Cited by 42
- Authors
- Buzzaccarini, G., Degliuomini, R. S., & Borin, M.
- Affiliations
- Vita-Salute San Raffaele University (IT)
- Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Buzzaccarini, Giovanni
- Venue
- Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
- Published
- 2023-05-31
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2211-2212
- ISSN
- 0364-216X (ISSN-L)
- 1432-5241
- OpenAlex
- W4378782373
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Facial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, artificial intelligence, aesthetic medicine, cosmetic surgery, patient counseling, treatment planning, personalized treatment, patient follow-up, AI chatbots, data privacy, algorithmic bias, moral norms, clinician education
- MeSH terms
- Artificial Intelligence, Esthetics, Humans, Rhinoplasty, Surgery, Plastic, Treatment Outcome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review