Structural barriers and pathways to artificial intelligence integration in plastic surgery
Plastic surgery stands at an inflection point: proofs-of-concept for artificial intelligence (AI) abound, yet responsible clinical integration remains limited. We argue this reflects an organizational readiness gap rather than a modeling deficit. Three modifiable barriers dominate: (i) limited AI literacy and fragmented clinician-data-science collaboration; (ii) an immature human-capital pipeline in which junior champions lack senior sponsorship and protected time; and (iii) misaligned incentives and scarce funding that undervalue data sets, code, and rigorous external validation. We propose a pragmatic agenda: embed AI literacy across training and CME; formalize partnerships with engineering/informatics via co-appointments and governance; set aside 4-8 h per week of protected time for data preparation, privacy, legal approvals, model deployment and monitoring; and enable multi-institution studies using privacy-preserving methods (e.g., federated learning). Aligning editorial and funding expectations to reward transparency, calibration, and negative findings can shift the field from one-off prototypes to accountable, generalizable tools that measurably improve patient care.
Authors
- Wesley P. Thayer (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8160-9552)
- Gregory A. Lamaris (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0099-2041)
- Georgios Karamitros (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2208-8539)
- Galen Perdikis (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4537-2591)
- William C. Lineaweaver (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6887-8491)
Institutions
- University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
- University of Maryland Medical Center (US)
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Plastic Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery
- Published
- 2025-10-25
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2025.10.026
- Citations
- 3
- Primary Topic
- Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 1.96