Should the Drs on the Recommended List be re-evaluated every year or so ?

[NewHare]

After reading the thread below, I had to question whether the drs on the recommended list should re-evaluated every year of so since it appears that there are/may be drs who are now doing sub par work.  If so what is the point of a recommended list if they are not all of the highest quality ? 

I was considering Dr Charles, however judging by the posts I read even though he is a 'recommended' dr his work seems to be questionable at best.

Which leaves me to wonder, which of the recommended drs, are actually recommended ?

NH   

 

 

 

Quote

The recommended list for this site, like any other lists, do not mean much. It means they had a few good reviews during their screening, but it seems to me like once they have been recommended and pay a monthly fee, they pretty much can do whatever they want with their practice. Like Dr. Diep, who just got removed from the list after years of bad practice.

Quote

If Dr Charles think this is a "good" result, then I am scared to see what a poor result from him would look like. I would avoid and look elsewhere.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[HappyMan2021]

Yes. 

 

[NikosHair]

• In answer to your question a most definite YES.
• In fact there needs to be constant evaluation.
• A dr/clinic that slides can do a lot of damage very quickly.
• At the moment all the patients journeys get dropped into two buckets. (see below)
• No one knows why there are two ????
• It would be far easier to track the recent performance of a doctor if they were filed in a sub folder by doctor.
• It's been highlighted in this thread. Click here

 

 

 

[mister_25]

39 minutes ago, NikosHair said:

• In answer to your question a most definite YES.
• In fact there needs to be constant evaluation.
• A dr/clinic that slides can do a lot of damage very quickly.
• At the moment all the patients journeys get dropped into two buckets. (see below)
• No one knows why there are two ????
• It would be far easier to track the recent performance of a doctor if they were filed in a sub folder by doctor.
• It's been highlighted in this thread. Click here

 

 

 

I actually don’t see a difference on the ways these two subs are used.

Experiences and A Surgeon Review are all apart of the patients result in the first place. Seems redundant to have two subs that are identical, causes confusion and a waste of time trying to remember which thread is in which sub.

I agree that subs based on the doctors would be useful, but the search engine is good enough where if I wanted to find every Bisanga result I would just type “Bisanga” or “BHR” and sort by content titles only. It works and it’s easy. The issue with having individual subs for each doctor is that newcomers wouldn’t know where to start, let them stumble on recent and active threads from various doctors and if they are interested they can search that particular doctor they can search that way. Otherwise the underrated and unknown doctors such as Thiago Bianco Leal would go unnoticed. 
 

Fully agree, doctors need to be reevaluated based on recent reviews. Once a year is a good enough timeframe. Otherwise outliers like Diep keep going on until someone calls BS. To be honest there are some doctors here that I haven’t seen a single result of in threads spanning since 2020 and there are some with issues that have become reoccurring.

Edited December 29, 2022 by mister_25
Accidentally posted mid typing, oops

[HappyMan2021]

17 minutes ago, mister_25 said:

To be honest there are some doctors here that I haven’t seen a single result of in threads spanning since 2020

agree. I just looked at the recommended list myself and a handful of the doctors are never mentioned on the forum and I can't recall any reviews of them. 

[drawdownfx]

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I think at the minimum they should be told to provide an X number of results every month, this is better than having a doc on recommended list who is showing zero evidence of recent excellence. I think it's wrong to penalize someone on the recommended list just because there aren't any recent patient journeys (since this is out of their hand) but they should all be held accountable via list of actions such as the above. A lot of good clinics already do this 

[Melvin- Admin]

One case does not define a surgeon. There’s a huge problem with reviewing surgeons based on one case. 

Recent case less than 1k grafts

 

 

We continually evaluate surgeons based on reviews and their results posted here. If there’s a community consensus that a surgeon shouldn’t be recommended, we will take it into account. But going around sharing one or two poor results isn’t enough to warrant a surgeons removal.

If that were the case we’d have no surgeons left and this forum would close down. Believe me every surgeon has at least one or two failed results every year. Furthermore, I contacted @callmebob2021 via pm to obtain his name and date of surgery to confirm he was a patient of Dr. Charles and to get Dr. Charles response, but he never responded. 

I can’t verify or confirm the legitimacy of the claims, or that he’s a patient without this information. 

[NikosHair]

42 minutes ago, mister_25 said:

I actually don’t see a difference on the ways these two subs are used.

👍

37 minutes ago, mister_25 said:

“Bisanga” or “BHR” and sort by content titles only.

You highlight the problem with search. People use there own way of identifying the dr/clinic.

If you look over in the 'buckets' now you'll see multiple threads with content titles that doesn't even mention the dr/clinic.

People mis-spell eg Deip Diep.

Search is just a bit clunky imo.

45 minutes ago, mister_25 said:

The issue with having individual subs for each doctor is that newcomers wouldn’t know where to start, let them stumble on recent and active threads from various doctors and if they are interested they can search that particular doctor they can search that way. Otherwise the underrated and unknown doctors such as Thiago Bianco Leal would go unnoticed. 

Have both. Like the Greek forum.

As you post your updated results in the dr sub folder, it updates the main folder with your post.

[mister_25]

5 minutes ago, NikosHair said:

👍

You highlight the problem with search. People use there own way of identifying the dr/clinic.

If you look over in the 'buckets' now you'll see multiple threads with content titles that doesn't even mention the dr/clinic.

People mis-spell eg Deip Diep.

Search is just a bit clunky imo.

Have both. Like the Greek forum.

As you post your updated results in the dr sub folder, it updates the main folder with your post.

Fair point on sharing a main folder being updated with the sub folder. That would alleviate my problem with having sub folders of doctors.

I haven’t had any issue with the search engine when it comes to searching for individual surgeons cases, which is kind of the point. I don’t get other clinics or surgeons results in the search other than the exception of getting Wong results when I search for Hasson but I think anyone can understand why since the two surgeons work at the same clinic and the clinic itself is called Hasson and Wong. It works as intended, you type up a name, sort by content titles only and you will get any thread who has that surgeons name in the title.

Here’s a idea, New Years wish list: I would like if you could search for threads in a graft range. I was very interested in seeing results in the quote I was given at the time (4000-4500) that way I could grab every result within that range and have a look what that number can do.

[Henry]

24 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

One case does not define a surgeon. There’s a huge problem with reviewing surgeons based on one case. 

Recent case less than 1k grafts

 

 

We continually evaluate surgeons based on reviews and their results posted here. If there’s a community consensus that a surgeon shouldn’t be recommended, we will take it into account. But going around sharing one or two poor results isn’t enough to warrant a surgeons removal.

If that were the case we’d have no surgeons left and this forum would close down. Believe me every surgeon has at least one or two failed results every year. Furthermore, I contacted @callmebob2021 via pm to obtain his name and date of surgery to confirm he was a patient of Dr. Charles and to get Dr. Charles response, but he never responded. 

I can’t verify or confirm the legitimacy of the claims, or that he’s a patient without this information. 

If this was the case then one or two good results in years also shouldn't warrant a recommendation, don't you think? 

[Melvin- Admin]

3 minutes ago, Henry said:

If this was the case then one or two good results in years also shouldn't warrant a recommendation, don't you think? 

Those are just two examples I quickly provided, he has far more results than that, and a long track record of over 20 years.

[Melvin- Admin]

13 minutes ago, mister_25 said:

Fair point on sharing a main folder being updated with the sub folder. That would alleviate my problem with having sub folders of doctors.

I haven’t had any issue with the search engine when it comes to searching for individual surgeons cases, which is kind of the point. I don’t get other clinics or surgeons results in the search other than the exception of getting Wong results when I search for Hasson but I think anyone can understand why since the two surgeons work at the same clinic and the clinic itself is called Hasson and Wong. It works as intended, you type up a name, sort by content titles only and you will get any thread who has that surgeons name in the title.

Here’s a idea, New Years wish list: I would like if you could search for threads in a graft range. I was very interested in seeing results in the quote I was given at the time (4000-4500) that way I could grab every result within that range and have a look what that number can do.

Actually ,our advanced search page is comprehensive. You can search by grafts, name, and tags. You can even search for recent to all the way back to 2001.

[NikosHair]

3 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Actually ,our advanced search page is comprehensive.

Real world, I'm unlikely to be interested in exactly 2500.

How would I search for all the patient journeys with a graft count between 2500 - 3000? (or any other range your're interested in?

[Fue3361]

I personally think a surgeon who is recommended should stay recommended by default, without need of review.

That said, I think that a more serious discussion should be had once 1-2 bad results pop up, and surgeons should be put “under review” and contacted for comment on said cases once this happens.  And if after that, more bad cases pop up, actions should be taken.  In the case of the last surgeon who was taken off, I think it took far too long to actually get a proper discussion started.

 

Edit:  It is also important to differentiate between bad work, and bad outcome.  Some people can have low yield, which is not always surgeon error.  On the other had, multies in hairline, bad angles and direction of grafts, butchered donor, this is always something that should bring surgeon under review.

Edited December 29, 2022 by Fue3361

[Henry]

13 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Those are just two examples I quickly provided, he has far more results than that, and a long track record of over 20 years.

I'm not talking about him specifically, I'm talking about recommended doctors who only has one or two patient reviews in years. Reviews posted by doctors or clinics themselves I guess helps but isnt this community supposed to be about/for patients, if we search a doctor here and all we are seeing are results posted by themselves, then how is that different from results being posted on their own clinic's website?

[Melvin- Admin]

15 minutes ago, NikosHair said:

Real world, I'm unlikely to be interested in exactly 2500.

How would I search for all the patient journeys with a graft count between 2500 - 3000? (or any other range your're interested in?

 

[Henry]

13 minutes ago, Fue3361 said:

I personally think a surgeon who is recommended should stay recommended by default, without need of review.

That said, I think that a more serious discussion should be had once 1-2 bad results pop up, and surgeons should be put “under review” and contacted for comment on said cases once this happens.  And if after that, more bad cases pop up, actions should be taken.  In the case of the last surgeon who was taken off, I think it took far too long to actually get a proper discussion started.

 

Edit:  It is also important to differentiate between bad work, and bad outcome.  Some people can have low yield, which is not always surgeon error.  On the other had, multies in hairline, bad angles and direction of grafts, butchered donor, this is always something that should bring surgeon under review.

Let's say a guy goes to an elite doctor, operates on him for 3500 grafts after a consultation, gets a poor yield after 12 months and after a biopsy it turns out that he has some scalp disease that prevented him from having a great result. To me, that's the doctor's responsibilty to make sure his patients has the best chance to have a great yield. Why don't they require a careful examination of the scalp first before operating? 

 

Edit: A poor yield is always the doctor's fault in my opinion (unless the patient goes out of his way to sabotage his results)

Edited December 29, 2022 by Henry

[Melvin- Admin]

1 minute ago, Henry said:

Let's say a guy goes to an elite doctor, operates on him for 3500 grafts after a consultation, gets a poor yield after 12 months and after a biopsy it turns out that he has some scalp disease that prevented him from having a great result. To me, that's the doctor's responsibilty to make sure his patients has the best chance to have a great yield. Why don't they require a careful examination of the scalp first before operating? 

It’s impossible in modern hair restoration. You cannot expect someone from the US whose having a hair transplant in lets say Europe or Asia to fly over just for an examination. Some doctors have started placing a mandatory face to face consultation for repairs like Dr. Bisanga. It’s not feasible or realistic for ALL procedures. It only works if you go to a surgeon local to you, but most patients travel for their procedures.

[NikosHair]

11 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Topics just give me the forum headings.

I'm a prospective patient looking for all the cases between 2500-3000 (that includes 2536 grafts, 2801 etc etc )

Edited December 29, 2022 by NikosHair

[Henry]

2 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

It’s impossible in modern hair restoration. You cannot expect someone from the US whose having a hair transplant in lets say Europe or Asia to fly over just for an examination. Some doctors have started placing a mandatory face to face consultation for repairs like Dr. Bisanga. It’s not feasible or realistic for ALL procedures. It only works if you go to a surgeon local to you, but most patients travel for their procedures.

Couldn't surgeons disclose the tests they need to take and let the patients do these tests locally to them and then email the results to their prospective hair transplant surgeons?

[mister_25]

33 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Actually ,our advanced search page is comprehensive. You can search by grafts, name, and tags. You can even search for recent to all the way back to 2001.

32 minutes ago, NikosHair said:

Real world, I'm unlikely to be interested in exactly 2500.

How would I search for all the patient journeys with a graft count between 2500 - 3000? (or any other range your're interested in?

I tried using your example and the only result that could come up was the post including your example. I feel like the search engine is really good at searching for surgeons, but not cases involving certain amount of grafts.

When you search by "2500 grafts" its a very specific number. A lot of people would generalize the amount they received to 2500 but some people (like myself) post the exact number. So instead of 3800 grafts, my 3872 grafts is snubbed out of the search results.

Here is a filter from a website of one of the recommended physicians. You can filter by Norwood Level, FUT/FUE and even FUT/FUE Mix and you can specify a graft range. If I put in 4000-4500 grafts (the number I was quoted in) I could find a Norwood 4 FUE Case who received 4311 grafts as a hypothetical. 

[Melvin- Admin]

10 minutes ago, NikosHair said:

Topics just give me the forum headings.

I'm a prospective patient looking for all the cases between 2500-3000 (that includes 2536 grafts, 2801 etc etc )

Topics give you threads/reviews, so anyone who’s had 2,500-3000 grafts would pop up. Further questions can be asked on that topic, so we don’t de-rail this thread.

[A Fue Good Men]

I think this is an excellent idea. Re-evaluation is a must. The timeframe can be adjusted but a default 1 year timeframe would be ideal in most scenarios.

 

I think this would help in timely addressing the clinics that are slipping. There are a few cases where doctors remained recommended on this forum and as a result continued to do damage to patients (erdogan, diep, bhatti). The good thing is the forum ended up doing the right thing in the end but at the cost of potentially more botched patients than there should have been.

[HairRun]

I vote yes, it's the right thing to do. It's unfortunate that some clinics are 'slipping', but we should reward and direct people to the clinics who keeping doing good for their patients. 

[Chetman2112]

Absolutely, maybe not every year but at least periodically, I feel there’s certainly some docs on this list that need re-evaluation and you hit the nail on the head.