RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Exosomes, diminutive extracellular vesicles, are integral to intercellular communication, harbouring potential for applications in regenerative medicine and aesthetic interventions. The field, however, grapples with the complexities of harmonising exosome characterisation protocols and safeguarding therapeutic integrity. METHODOLOGY: In this scholarly overview, systematic adherence to the Cochrane Collaboration and Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews guidelines was observed, scrutinising the congruence of exosome-related therapies with the Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles standards delineated by the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles, alongside criteria set forth by the International Society for Cell Therapy and the International Society for Stem Cell Research. A meticulous search strategy spanning databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane database was employed to encapsulate studies pertinent to the isolation, characterisation, and functional assessment of exosomes. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 225 articles, of which 17 systematic reviews were selected based on predefined criteria, encompassing 556 primary studies. Notwithstanding the acknowledged therapeutic promise of exosome modalities, the synthesis illuminated a prevalent deficiency in adherence to established reporting and experimental benchmarks, notably in exosome source characterisation and bioactive constituent delineation. A critical appraisal employing the AMSTAR-2 tool underscored a pervasive shortfall in methodological rigour. CONCLUSION: This review accentuates the imperative for stringent methodological standardisation within exosome research to fortify the validity and reproducibility of empirical findings. Amidst the burgeoning therapeutic optimism, the discipline must rectify methodological disparities and comply with regulatory mandates, ensuring the ethically sound and scientifically robust advancement of exosome-based therapeutic modalities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The study investigates the impact of social media reviews and brand identity on consumer preferences in the non-surgical aesthetics products across different generations. It highlights the evolving landscape of aesthetic medicine and surgery, driven by technological advancements and a cultural shift towards individual well-being. The research aims to explore the interplay between generational preferences, the influence of social media, and the role of brand identity in shaping consumer decisions. METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was employed, with a sample size of > 5000 participants stratified across various generational cohorts. The study utilized an online questionnaire to capture both quantitative and qualitative insights into consumer behaviour, with statistical analysis performed to identify patterns and relationships. RESULTS: Analysis of 5850 responses revealed distinct generational preferences and behaviours. Social media engagement varied significantly across generations, with younger cohorts placing a higher emphasis on online reviews. The study also found that brand identity's influence is diminishing in decision-making processes, with consumers increasingly relying on peer reviews and social media content. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight a pivotal shift in the non-surgical aesthetics consumer market, emphasizing the growing importance of social media and peer reviews over traditional brand identities. Importantly, the study underscores the critical need for integrating patient safety and evidence-based practice within marketing strategies. As consumer preferences evolve towards valuing transparency and authenticity, non-surgical aesthetics providers must prioritize these elements, ensuring that their services are not only appealing but also grounded in safety and scientific validity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: "This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 ."