Our Rating Methodology
How We Evaluate Plastic Surgeons and Award Stars
A transparent outcome-based system designed to identify surgeons who consistently deliver exceptional patient results.
Why We Created This System
Patients often struggle to understand how to choose a truly outstanding plastic surgeon.
Traditional indicators such as social media popularity, clinic size, awards, advertising, celebrity patients, or years of experience do not consistently predict outcomes.
Our mission is to create a transparent, outcome-based evaluation system that rewards measurable quality, long-term consistency, and patient trust.
Our stars are awarded per procedure category, not to the surgeon overall.
Example Rating Cards
⭐⭐⭐ Rhinoplasty
⭐ Facial Rejuvenation
Evaluation Principles
Results Over Reputation
We evaluate outcomes, not marketing.
Long-Term Outcomes Matter
Early postoperative appearance is not enough.
Independent Data Collection
Evaluation is based primarily on independently collected patient follow-up.
Procedure-Specific Excellence
Ratings are assigned separately for each specialization.
Continuous Revalidation
Stars expire and must be maintained.
Eligibility Requirements
✓ Valid professional licensing and legal eligibility to practice
✓ Verified specialization
✓ Minimum clinical experience
✓ Minimum annual procedure volume
✓ Agreement to independent outcome monitoring
✓ Participation in patient follow-up program
Meeting eligibility requirements does not guarantee certification or stars.
Data Collection Process
Step 1: Preoperative Registration
Patients participating in our system are enrolled before surgery. Include: Procedure type, Surgeon, Treatment goals, Standardized baseline photos, Consent for longitudinal outcome evaluation.
This prevents retrospective selection of only successful cases.
Step 2: Independent Follow-Up
Typical checkpoints: 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months. Longer periods may apply for selected procedures.
Step 3: Quality Verification
Submitted information undergoes verification procedures designed to improve consistency and reduce bias. Cases with insufficient follow-up may receive reduced weighting.
Scoring Framework
100
POINTS
Outcome Quality — 35 points
Natural appearance, Technical execution, Balance and harmony, Goal achievement, Independent visual review
Long-Term Stability — 20 points
Outcome durability, Evolution over time, Stability at follow-up milestones
Safety and Clinical Quality — 20 points
Complication patterns, Revision frequency, Recovery consistency, Postoperative support
Case Complexity — 10 points
Revision procedures, Complex anatomy, Challenging cases, Breadth of expertise
Professional Trust — 10 points
Peer recognition, Professional standing, Independent nomination mechanisms
Patient Experience — 5 points
Expectation alignment, Communication quality, Overall treatment journey
Star System
○
Participant
Surgeon contributes outcome data.
✓
Verified Outcomes
Sufficient validated data available.
⭐
One Star — Excellent
Consistently high-quality outcomes.
Approximate threshold: Top 20%.
⭐⭐
Two Stars — Outstanding
Exceptional and sustained performance.
Approximate threshold: Top 5%.
⭐⭐⭐
Three Stars — Exceptional
Rare distinction awarded only to surgeons demonstrating world-class consistency.
Approximate threshold: Top 1%.
Maintaining Status
Ratings are not permanent. Surgeons undergo regular reassessment.
• Maintained
• Upgraded
• Suspended
• Removed
Independence and Integrity
Participation in our platform does not guarantee certification.
Commercial relationships do not influence evaluation outcomes.
Stars cannot be purchased.
Recognition is earned through measurable performance and sustained excellence.
Our goal is simple
To help patients choose with greater confidence and to reward surgeons who consistently deliver exceptional outcomes.
