Preserving the Legitimacy of Board Certification.
Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data
Policy commentary and expert opinion containing no empirical clinical or observational data.
PubMed 28301365 · doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000001035
What was done
This commentary outlines efforts by the American Board of Cosmetic Surgery to obtain regulatory equivalency with American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) member boards under Louisiana's 2011 truth-in-advertising law. It describes the positions of various medical specialty organizations advocating before the Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners regarding the qualifications required to advertise as "board certified."
What was found
The abstract reports no empirical data or quantitative metrics. It presents arguments that certifying boards lacking ACGME or American Osteopathic Association (AOA) accreditation generate unacceptable training variability and that board equivalency requires equivalent scope, duration, and independent oversight.
Why it matters
The paper frames the legal and regulatory debate over specialty board certification standards and physician marketing, arguing that strict credentialing protects patients from misleading claims of expertise.
Limits
This is a narrative policy commentary representing the viewpoint of established medical societies rather than an empirical study. It contains no clinical outcome data, patient safety statistics, or systematic analyses.
Cited by
- supports The American Board of Cosmetic Surgery is not recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS).