Porcentaje de quienes luego se arrepienten de cada elección. Las barras y el registro completo aparecen abajo.
Salud
Última revisión 2026-04-26
Calidad de la evidencia 3.75/5
Puntuación de revisión en ocho dimensiones según la
rúbrica de calidad
. Cada dimensión puntuada de 1 a 5.
D1 Verificación de fuentes
4/5
D2 Autoridad e independencia de las fuentes
4/5
D3 Precisión de la tasa de arrepentimiento
1/5
D4 Comparabilidad de las fuentes
2/5
D5 Patrón de Gilovich
5/5
D6 Calidad de la prosa
5/5
D7 Completitud de las advertencias
5/5
D8 Calidad de la muestra
4/5
Media3.75/5
Datos sustitutos — no existe ninguna encuesta directa sobre el arrepentimiento para esta decisión. Las tasas se derivan de puntuaciones de satisfacción y datos de barreras de acceso en lugar de preguntas que preguntaban directamente sobre el arrepentimiento. Ver advertencias más abajo.
Arrepentimiento por acción
Operarse de cirugía estética
10%
~10% lamentan el procedimiento (rango 5-33% por tipo)
Pacientes de cirugía cosmética, revisión sistemática multi-estudio
retrospectivo, típicamente 1-5 años post-procedimiento
Arrepentimiento por inacción
No operarse de cirugía estética
7,0%
~5% (proxy de marcador de posición — no existe encuesta directa)
A 2024 American Journal of Surgery
systematic review places cosmetic surgery regret at
roughly 5—33% depending on procedure type: breast augmentation sits at
the low end (5—9%), body contouring at the high end (11—33%). That
review does not compute a single cross-procedure average, so we estimate ~10%
as a conservative editorial estimate near the lower-middle of that range
for elective cosmetic procedures, not a computed midpoint. A companion
2023 PMC narrative summary of the decision-regret literature does not add
its own numeric range but corroborates which factors drive regret (see
below); the AJS review itself reports rates only. On the inaction side, no large-sample survey directly measures regret about not
having cosmetic surgery. General body-dissatisfaction data (37% of
Americans per Ipsos) and cosmetic-consideration rates (70% per ASDS)
suggest that a non-trivial minority of non-patients harbor lasting
appearance dissatisfaction, but the 7% inaction figure is a ceiling
proxy — the Ipsos-reported share who say they would be willing to
undergo cosmetic surgery to achieve their ideal body — not a measured
regret rate or a survey finding about regret.
The pattern runs counter to the classic Gilovich finding. For most life
decisions, inaction regret dominates over time: people regret the degree not
pursued, the trip not taken, the relationship not attempted. Cosmetic surgery
inverts this because the action is irreversible, physically invasive, and
financially costly. A rhinoplasty that narrows the bridge too aggressively
cannot be fully undone; a breast augmentation that causes capsular contracture
is a daily reminder. The 2023 PMC review of the decision-regret literature
(not the 2024 AJS review, which reports rates only) identifies inadequate
preoperative education, limited use of decisional tools, and postoperative
complications as the strongest predictors of regret — suggesting that the
action-regret rate is substantially reducible through better screening and
counseling.
The main caveat is the asymmetry of evidence. The action side has genuine
peer-reviewed systematic reviews with procedure-specific breakdowns. The
inaction side has essentially nothing: body dissatisfaction surveys measure a
different construct, and ASDS consideration rates conflate casual curiosity
with genuine surgical intent. The 7% inaction figure used here is a ceiling
proxy — willingness to undergo cosmetic surgery, not a measured regret rate.
If a rigorous survey ever asks a representative sample of non-patients “Do
you regret not having cosmetic surgery?”, the true figure could be higher or
lower — and the direction of the Gilovich pattern could flip. Until then,
the delta (0.03) should be read as roughly balanced with a slight tilt
toward action regret, not as a precise quantitative claim.
Fuentes: acción
Registro de evidencia
Cada número a continuación es lo que reportó cada fuente, con la cita textual en la que nos basamos y cómo llegamos a nuestra cifra. Haz clic en cualquier enlace para verificarlo directamente.
[1]The American Journal of Surgery — A systematic review of patient regret after surgery↗ 1 other entry
Revisado por pares
Regret after elective plastic surgery ranges from 5–33%; breast augmentation 5.1–9.1%, body contouring 10.82–33.3%
Extracto
“"Regret after elective plastic surgery operations is significantly higher compared to gender-affirming surgery. The percentage of patients reporting regret ranged from 0 to 47.1% in breast reconstruction, 5.1–9.1% in breast augmentation, and 10.82–33.3% in body contouring."
”
Datos de la fuente de
2024-04-30
Accedido
2026-07-07
Cálculo
2024 AJS systematic review of patient regret across surgical subspecialties. Reported ranges for cosmetic procedures: breast augmentation 5.1–9.1%, body contouring 10.82–33.3%. The review provides the most comprehensive cross-specialty data but does not compute a weighted average across procedures. We use ~10% as a conservative editorial estimate sitting at the lower-middle of the cosmetic (non-reconstructive) range — not a computed midpoint — acknowledging the enormous variance by procedure type. This review reports regret rates only and does not analyze predictors or drivers of regret; the predictor finding below (preoperative education, decisional tools, postoperative complications) comes from the companion PMC 2023 source only, not from this review.
[2]Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open — Decision Regret in Plastic Surgery: A Summary
Revisado por pares
Qualitative summary of decision-regret literature; preoperative education, decisional tools, and postoperative complications are the strongest predictors
Extracto
“"After review of the literature, preoperative education, decisional tools, and postoperative complications were found to be the most important factors affecting decision regret after surgery."
”
Datos de la fuente de
2023-06-01
Accedido
2026-07-07
Cálculo
PMC 2023 narrative summary of the decision-regret literature in plastic surgery (Jones, Cruz, Stewart, Losken; PRS Global Open). It does not report a single aggregate cosmetic regret rate; instead it identifies preoperative education, decisional tools, and postoperative complications as the strongest predictors of regret. The formal literature it draws on concentrates on breast reconstruction and gender-reaffirming procedures rather than aesthetic surgery. Used as a corroborating source on regret drivers, not for the numeric rate.
Fuentes: inacción
Registro de evidencia
Cada número a continuación es lo que reportó cada fuente, con la cita textual en la que nos basamos y cómo llegamos a nuestra cifra. Haz clic en cualquier enlace para verificarlo directamente.
[1]Ipsos — Most Americans Experience Feeling Dissatisfied with How Their Body Looks from Time to Time↗ 2 other entries
Estudio primario
7% of Americans say they would be willing to undergo cosmetic surgery to achieve their ideal body; 37% feel dissatisfied with their body whenever they look in the mirror
Extracto
“"Americans are not as willing to undergo cosmetic surgery (7%), consume laxatives (4%), and/or purge/throw-up after eating (1%)."
”
Datos de la fuente de
2018-01-10
Accedido
2026-07-07
Cálculo
Ipsos survey of 1,004 US adults (Jan 3–5, 2018). No published survey directly asks non-patients whether they regret not having cosmetic surgery, so no true inaction-regret figure exists. Rather than invent a downward adjustment, this entry uses the survey's own directly-reported 7% figure: the share of respondents who said they would be willing to undergo cosmetic surgery to achieve their ideal body (grouped by Ipsos among the least-chosen extreme measures, alongside laxative use and purging), used as a ceiling/context proxy. It bounds the population plausibly dissatisfied enough with their appearance to entertain surgery, and so plausibly able to feel inaction regret, versus the much broader 37% general mirror-dissatisfaction figure, which includes many people who would never consider surgery specifically. This is explicitly a willingness proxy, not a measured regret rate, and should be read as an order-of-magnitude ceiling, not a finding.
[2]Practical Dermatology / ASDS — 2025 ASDS Survey: 70% of Consumers Considering Cosmetic Procedures
Fuente de referencia
70% of Americans are considering a cosmetic dermatologic procedure
Extracto
“"Seventy percent of Americans are considering a cosmetic dermatologic procedure."
”
Datos de la fuente de
2025-03-01
Accedido
2026-07-07
Cálculo
ASDS annual consumer survey. The 70% consideration rate is inflated by including minimally invasive treatments (Botox, fillers) alongside surgical procedures, and reflects loose interest rather than intent to act. No published survey directly measures inaction regret; this source is retained as corroborating context on the gap between broad "considering" figures and genuine willingness, not as the basis for the 7% proxy (see the Ipsos source above and caveats below).
Advertencias
Las cifras de acción e inacción no son simétricas en metodología o rigor. La estimación del ~10% de arrepentimiento por acción se deriva de dos revisiones sistemáticas (PMC 2023, AJS 2024) que reportan rangos específicos de procedimientos (aumento de senos 5-9%, contorno corporal 11-33%) pero ninguna cifra agregada. El 5% del lado de inacción es un proxy de marcador de posición — ninguna encuesta de gran muestra pregunta directamente a no pacientes si lamentan no haberse hecho cirugía cosmética. La tasa de insatisfacción corporal de Ipsos (37%) es demasiado amplia, y la tasa de consideración de ASDS (70%) refleja interés laxo, no arrepentimiento. El 5% debe tratarse como un proxy de marcador de posición de orden de magnitud, no un hallazgo. Debido a que ambos lados conllevan incertidumbre sustancial, la delta (0,05) debe leerse como «aproximadamente equilibrado con una ligera inclinación hacia el arrepentimiento por acción» más que como una afirmación cuantitativa precisa. La cirugía cosmética es un contraejemplo al hallazgo típico de dominancia de inacción de Gilovich y Medvec: la irreversibilidad, el riesgo de cicatrices físicas y el costo financiero del procedimiento sostienen el arrepentimiento por acción de una manera que la cirugía electiva no realizada no lo hace.
