MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7086824739 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17308351

Weight-Loss Surgery & Tummy Tuck Demand Across 8 Major North American Cities (2023–2025)

2025· report· en· W7086824739 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typereport
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyDescriptive statisticsMileChartWeight lossTable (database)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overview. This observational report quantifies consumer interest in weight-loss surgery (bariatric surgery, sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass) and tummy tuck (abdominoplasty) across eight large North American cities—New York, Los Angeles, Toronto, Chicago, Houston, Dallas, Phoenix, and Tampa. Using Google Keyword Planner data from Aug 2023–Jul 2025, we aggregated average monthly search volume and computed year-over-year (YoY) change to profile regional demand. Methods. City-level keyword groups were standardized (e.g., “weight loss surgery,” “bariatric surgery,” “sleeve gastrectomy,” “tummy tuck,” “abdominoplasty,” “best tummy tuck surgeon + [city]”). Metrics reported include average monthly searches by category and YoY % change. No inferential statistics were performed; this is a descriptive trends analysis. Key findings. Overall search interest is highest in New York and Los Angeles. Tummy tuck demand clusters in Sun Belt markets (Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, Tampa), while weight-loss surgery shows the fastest YoY growth in Toronto and Phoenix. These patterns suggest staged care—medical weight reduction followed by body contouring—remains a common pathway. Use. Results can guide clinic capacity planning, patient education, and localized SEO strategy. The record includes a publication-ready table and a combined bar + line chart for reuse with attribution. For consumer guides and surgeon discovery, visit https://www.aestheticmatch.com/. License: CC BY 4.0.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicCancer-related molecular mechanisms researchFrench-language works237,207