首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>The Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology >Speaker Publication Profiles from Major Conferences in Aesthetics Plastic Surgery and Dermatology
【2h】

Speaker Publication Profiles from Major Conferences in Aesthetics Plastic Surgery and Dermatology

机译:美学整形外科和皮肤病学重大会议的演讲者出版物简介

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: Aesthetics remains a novel, poorly-regulated field of medicine. >Objectives: This study compared the scientific backgrounds of speakers at major conferences related to aesthetic medicine. >Methods: Records from conferences that took place in 2015 in aesthetics (Facial Aesthetic Conference and Exhibition [FACE]), plastic surgery (British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons [BAAPS]), and dermatology (British Association of Dermatologists [BAD]) were reviewed for professional backgrounds and publication histories of conference speakers. >Results: FACE 2015 was the largest conference and included “aesthetics doctors” among speakers from diverse professional backgrounds. Speakers at BAD 2015 and BAAPS 2015 were mostly dermatologists and plastic surgeons. Overall and when grouped by profession, speakers at FACE 2015 had fewer authorships and were less likely to have authored any peer-reviewed papers. Only 17 percent of speakers at FACE 2015 had contributed to relevant publications. Aesthetics doctors only averaged 0.37 authorships versus plastic surgeons (6.76) and dermatologists (13.92). >Conclusion: Most of the talks at FACE 2015 were presented by individuals with limited scientific backgrounds. The publication profiles of both FACE 2015 and aesthetic doctors were inconsistent with their fellow congresses and medical specialities. The results for aesthetic doctors might fall below the threshold deemed acceptable for doctors presenting themselves as experts in a branch of medicine, and might reflect a critical dearth of evidence-based practices in aesthetic medicine.
机译:>背景:美学仍然是一种新兴的,管理不善的医学领域。 >目标:本研究比较了与美容医学相关的主要会议的演讲者的科学背景。 >方法: 2015年在美学(面部美容会议和展览[FACE]),整形外科(英国美容整形外科医生协会[BAAPS])和皮肤病学(英国美容协会)上召开的会议的记录审查了皮肤科医生[BAD],以了解会议发言人的专业背景和出版历史。 >结果: FACE 2015是规模最大的会议,其中包括来自不同专业背景的演讲者中的“美学医生”。在BAD 2015和BAAPS 2015上的演讲者大多是皮肤科医生和整形外科医生。总体而言,按专业分组时,FACE 2015的演讲者的作者人数少,撰写任何经过同行评审的论文的可能性也很小。在FACE 2015上,只有17%的发言人为相关出版物做出了贡献。美学医生的平均作者人数为0.37,而整形外科医生(6.76)和皮肤科医生(13.92)。 >结论:在FACE 2015上的大多数演讲都是由具有有限科学背景的个人介绍的。 FACE 2015和美容医生的出版物资料与他们的国会代表和医学专业不一致。美容医生的结果可能会低于认为自己是医学分支专家的医生可接受的阈值,并且可能反映出美容医学中基于证据的做法严重缺乏。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号