Poland Beauty Clinic Rating Structural Verification Index — aesthetic medicine & plastic surgery
By procedure: Rhinoplasty Breast surgery Liposuction & body contouring Hair transplant Injectables Medical weight loss

How we measure

Version 1.0.0, updated 2026-08-29. Public name of the score: Structural Verification Index. Every number on this site can be recomputed from the published data and the rules on this page: the engine reads the same file this page is rendered from.

What we check — and what we do not

We check structural trust facts against official public registers: who the responsible physician is, what certification and licence the registers confirm, whether the facility and the legal entity can be traced, whether the clinic discloses its own identifiers, whether its advertising is honest, whether its language fronts agree, and whether patient documents are published.

We do not assess outcomes, skill or complications. A high score means the clinic is well verified, not that treatment there is right for you. This is not medical advice.

The unit

One record = one clinic in this country: brand + address + responsible physician. The named physician is the load-bearing field — every register check is by name. Procedure segment and city are facets, not units.

Inclusion policy

Four mechanical conditions. The first three decide whether a clinic is listed; the fourth whether it can be scored.

  1. Identifiable: a live public surface and a working in-country contact on the check date.
  2. Provides the service itself: not an aggregator, booking site, affiliate or tour packager.
  3. In scope: the intervention is performed by a physician — plastic or aesthetic surgery, hair transplant, physician-led injectables or device treatments, medical weight loss. Out: salons, barbers, nails/brows/lashes, spas, med-spas without a named physician.
  4. Names a responsible physician. Otherwise the record is published as verification unavailable: listed, not scored, no rank. Unknown is not fault — a missing name is a statement about coverage, not an accusation.

Country register map

The map for Poland was compiled 2026-08-29, before any clinic research. A class marked as absent makes its axis not applicable; a register that cannot be scripted leaves its axis cells as 'could not verify', without penalty. We never simulate a register.

Specialist board registerRPWDL — practice register bulk export (wspolnicy.csv: Dziedzina medycyny + Specjalizacja per practitioner), with NIL Centralny Rejestr Lekarzy as the captcha-gated fallback (open, machine-readable)
SCRIPTABLE RECIPE (no key, no cookie, no CAPTCHA; plain curl with a browser UA): GET https://rpwdl2.ezdrowie.gov.pl/api/rpwdl-public-resource/ledgers-zip/initial?activityType=PHYSICIAN_PRACTICE&activeLedgers=true&fileTypeInsideZip=CSV, then read wspolnicy.csv from the ZIP. Its columns are: Id wspolnika; Id praktyki; Numer ksiegi; Typ praktyki; Zawod opis; Numer wpisu do rej. zawodowego; Numer prawa wykonywania zawodu; Numer wpisu do ewidencji gospodarczej; Imie; Drugie imie; Nazwisko; Dziedzina medycyny; Nip; Specjalizacja; Data rozp. dzialalnosci; Data rozp. dzialalnosci art. 104; Data zak. dzialalnosci. The Specjalizacja field is a parenthesised list of (code, name, degree) triples — 'II stopien specjalizacji' or 'specjalista' is the full board specialisation, 'I stopien specjalizacji' is the older first-degree qualification, and the two must not be conflated when scoring M1. Use activityType=GROUP_PHYSICIAN_PRACTICE for group practices (verified to return data on 2026-08-29); PHYSICIAN_PRACTICE alone yields only Typ praktyki 'I' (indywidualna). Match on surname plus first name and confirm with PWZ or NIP, since several same-surname doctors appear. COVERAGE CAVEAT, which is the real limit of this axis: the register lists practitioners who have registered their own individual or group practice. A doctor who works only as an employee of a clinic entity, and has never registered a practice of their own, will not appear at all — absence here is not evidence of a missing specialisation, so such a card gets a null cell, never a penalty. FALLBACK for that case, still not scriptable: NIL's Centralny Rejestr Lekarzy at https://rejestr.nil.org.pl/, a Kotlin/Kilua app whose backend is POST https://rejestr.nil.org.pl/rpc/routeRejestrServiceManager{0,1,2} = pobierzParametry / szukaj / pobierzStrone. Route 0 answers unauthenticated and reported 292 639 registered physicians as of 2026-08-28 with wylaczCaptcha=false; route 1 takes params [Zapytanie, recaptchaToken] with Zapytanie = {pwz, imie, nazwisko, pesel, nazwiskoInne, akceptacjaRegulaminu}, both JSON-encoded as strings, but empty, null and fabricated tokens are all rejected server-side with {"error":"Nie zaznaczono pola \"Nie jestem robotem\""} before any other validation runs, so it needs a browser-solved reCAPTCHA v2 token and cannot be used unattended.
Medical licence registerRPWDL — practice register bulk export (wspolnicy.csv: Numer prawa wykonywania zawodu / PWZ), with NIL Centralny Rejestr Lekarzy as the captcha-gated fallback (open, machine-readable)
Same recipe, file and columns as specialist_board — see that entry. What this register does and does not prove: it evidences that a named practitioner holds PWZ number N, is entered in a named okregowa izba lekarska, and runs a practice whose start date is recorded and whose end date is NULL. It does not restate NIL's live licence status (suspension or withdrawal of prawo wykonywania zawodu), which only the NIL register holds, so treat a PWZ found here as licence-number provenance rather than a real-time validity check, and cross-read the practice's Data zak. dzialalnosci and praktyki.csv's Numer/Data uchwaly wykr. for signs the practice was struck off. Same COVERAGE CAVEAT as specialist_board: employed-only doctors who never registered a practice do not appear, and their cell is null rather than a penalty. FALLBACK, not scriptable: NIL Centralny Rejestr Lekarzy, https://rejestr.nil.org.pl/ — the PWZ-only variant of the RPC query (Zapytanie with pwz set and every name field null) was tried on 2026-08-29 and returned the identical server-side CAPTCHA rejection as the name query, so licence verification by PWZ number is blocked there in exactly the same way.
Facility registerRPWDL — Rejestr Podmiotow Wykonujacych Dzialalnosc Lecznicza (Register of Entities Performing Medical Activity) (open, machine-readable)
SCRIPTABLE RECIPE (no key, no cookie, no CAPTCHA; plain curl with a browser UA): GET https://rpwdl2.ezdrowie.gov.pl/api/rpwdl-public-resource/ledgers-zip/initial?activityType=<TYPE>&activeLedgers=true&fileTypeInsideZip=CSV returns a ZIP. activityType accepts HEALTHCARE_PROVIDER (entities; the ZIP contains podmioty.csv, zaklady.csv, jednostki.csv, komorki.csv, kontrole.csv, swiadczenia.csv, akredyt_jakosci.csv, akredyt_ksztalcenia.csv and Info.txt), plus PHYSICIAN_PRACTICE, NURSING_PRACTICE, PHYSIOTHERAPY_PRACTICE, DIAGNOSTIC_PRACTICE and their GROUP_ variants (GROUP_PHYSICIAN_PRACTICE, GROUP_NURSING_PRACTICE, GROUP_PHYSIOTHERAPY_PRACTICE, GROUP_DIAGNOSTIC_PRACTICE) — all verified to return ZIP data on 2026-08-29. fileTypeInsideZip also accepts XML. Any other activityType value returns HTTP 400 with code ACTIVITY_TYPE_IS_INCORRECT. The export is large and slow (about 13-14 minutes each for the 34 MB entity ZIP and the 38 MB physician-practice ZIP), so cache it once per wave and grep locally by NIP, REGON or name instead of re-fetching per clinic; allow a curl timeout of at least 20 minutes, since a 2-minute cap silently truncates the archive and unzip then reports a missing end-of-central-directory. podmioty.csv columns: ID Ksiegi; NIP; REGON; Numer ksiegi rejestrowej; Data wykreslenia z rejestru; Data wydania decyzji o wykresleniu; Data zmiany wpisu; Numer decyzji; Typ organu; Kod organu; Forma organizacyjno-prawna (+opis); Nazwa; Nazwa podmiotu; Teryt (+opis); Ulica; Budynek; Lokal; Kod pocztowy; Miejscowosc; Telefon; Email; Strona WWW; Kod SIMC; Kod ulicy; Kod/Nazwa podmiotu tworzacego; Data rozpoczecia dzialalnosci; Data rozp. dzial. art. 104; Data zakonczenia dzialalnosci; Poczatek/Koniec okresu zawieszenia. zaklady.csv keys back on 'ID Ksiegi' (the short numeric id, NOT the zero-padded ksiega number) and adds Rodzaj dzialalnosci per site. Supporting open endpoint for decoding coded columns: GET https://rpwdl2.ezdrowie.gov.pl/api/rpwdl-dictionary/generic/ACTIVITY_TYPE (and the other dictionary codes) returns JSON with no CAPTCHA. WHAT IS STILL GATED: the interactive search the SPA uses — POST /api/rpwdl-healthcare-provider-ledger/ledgers/search and GET /api/rpwdl-healthcare-provider-ledger/ledgers/{id} — requires a 'recaptchaToken' request header and rejects a fabricated one with HTTP 403 NO_ACCESS_TO_THE_RESOURCE, and /ledgers-zip/filtered-csv is likewise 403. Per-clinic live lookup is therefore captcha-gated, but the register is open in bulk, and that is what makes this axis usable. The same export is mirrored on dane.gov.pl dataset 728 'Rejestr Podmiotow Wykonujacych Dzialalnosc Lecznicza' (resources 70070 CSV and 65539 XML for entities, 65531/65540 for individual physician practices), whose resource links resolve back to this identical ledgers-zip service. Caveat unchanged: clinic brand names often differ from the legally registered Nazwa, so match on NIP or REGON where possible.
Company registerKrajowy Rejestr Sadowy (KRS) — Ministry of Justice open API (companies); CEIDG for sole-trader (jednoosobowa dzialalnosc gospodarcza) practitioners (open, machine-readable)
SCRIPTABLE RECIPE (companies): GET https://api-krs.ms.gov.pl/api/krs/OdpisAktualny/{10-digit-krs}?rejestr=P&format=json for the current extract, or /api/krs/OdpisPelny/{krs}?rejestr=P&format=json for the full history (verified, 44 982 bytes for the same company). rejestr=P is the register of entrepreneurs; rejestr=S (associations and foundations) returns 404 for a P-register entity, so the right register has to be chosen. No key and no rate-limit headers observed; plain curl with a browser UA works. KNOWN LIMITATION: the API has no search-by-name endpoint — it is a lookup by KRS number only, and POSTing to the front end's own search on wyszukiwarka-krs.ms.gov.pl still returns the Incapsula interstitial. Resolve name or NIP to a KRS number in two steps: (a) take the clinic's NIP and REGON from RPWDL's podmioty.csv, then (b) GET https://wl-api.mf.gov.pl/api/search/nip/{nip}?date=YYYY-MM-DD (Ministry of Finance Biala Lista podatnikow VAT, open, no key), whose result.subject.krs field carries the KRS number; /api/search/regon/{regon} behaves the same way. Biala Lista's /api/search/name/{name} was tried and answered HTTP 404 WL-190 'Niepoprawne zadanie', so it is not a usable name-search substitute. Biala Lista also independently reports statusVat, a second official datum on whether the company is trading. SECOND LIMITATION (RODO): the KRS API masks natural-person names — board members and shareholders come back as 'A********' and 'J*****' with PESEL as '7**********' — so the API can evidence the legal entity, its share capital, its PKD scope and its representation rules, but cannot be used to name a director; the browser wyszukiwarka shows those names to a human. CEIDG (sole traders, which covers many solo aesthetic-medicine practices) is NOT open: the current API is https://dane.biznes.gov.pl/api/ceidg/v3/firmy?nip={nip} and returned {"message":"Unauthorized","http_status_code":401} without a JWT (the token is free but requires registration), the older /v2 path is gone (404), and the legacy aplikacja.ceidg.gov.pl search page still answers curl with an Akamai 'Access Denied'. For a sole trader, RPWDL's own practice export is the open substitute: praktyki.csv carries Forma organizacyjno-prawna 0700 'dzialalnosc gospodarcza prowadzona przez osobe fizyczna' with the practice's NIP and registered address, which evidences the trading entity without CEIDG. legal_entity is therefore open for spolki via KRS and open-with-lower-detail for sole traders via RPWDL; do not substitute third-party KRS mirrors such as rejestr.io or aleo.com for either.
Sanctions / discipline registerno public register of this class in this country
Foreign-patient registerno public register of this class in this country

The nine axes

Every axis is a fact or a quote from a public source, scored 1–5 against a fixed rubric. There are no editorial axes. Each cell carries its sources, its source class (official register / secondary) and its check date.

Fame, review volume, domain age and social-media following are scored nowhere.

M1 · Specialist certification of the responsible physician — weight 26

Whether the physician named as responsible for this clinic is found in the country's specialist board register with a current specialisation matching the advertised segment (plastic surgery or dermatology, by segment).

Register class: Specialist board register — RPWDL — practice register bulk export (wspolnicy.csv: Dziedzina medycyny + Specjalizacja per practitioner), with NIL Centralny Rejestr Lekarzy as the captcha-gated fallback.

ValueAnchor
5Found by name or number; specialty matches what is advertised; status current.
4Found; specialty adjacent to what is advertised (noted on the profile).
3Found in the register; the register does not disclose specialty.
2Only a secondary source (association, aggregator) supports the certification.
1Certification is claimed and found in no source.

M2 · Identifiability of the responsible physician — weight 16

Whether a patient can name the specific physician and their role before making contact, and whether that physician is tied to this location.

ValueAnchor
5Physician(s) named with role and tied to this address.
4Named; role unclear.
3A name appears in only one place on the site.
2Surname or initials without a full name.
1'Our team' only — this is the gate state 'verification unavailable'.

M3 · Basic medical licence — weight 8

Whether the responsible physician's registration is found in the country's medical licence register.

Register class: Medical licence register — RPWDL — practice register bulk export (wspolnicy.csv: Numer prawa wykonywania zawodu / PWZ), with NIL Centralny Rejestr Lekarzy as the captcha-gated fallback.

ValueAnchor
5Matched by licence number.
4Matched by name.
3Register not machine-accessible; the clinic publishes the number.
2Licence claimed without a number.
1Public data contradicts the claim.

M4 · Facility registration — weight 10

Whether the operating location is found in the facility register (where the country has one; otherwise this axis is not applicable).

Register class: Facility register — RPWDL — Rejestr Podmiotow Wykonujacych Dzialalnosc Lecznicza (Register of Entities Performing Medical Activity).

ValueAnchor
5Record found: name, address and status match.
4Record found with a spelling discrepancy.
3Register exists; no record found (we do not claim 'unlicensed').
2Only the clinic's own statement.
1A published registration number is contradicted by the register (verified false → flag).

M5 · Legal-entity traceability — weight 8

Who is legally responsible: a legal entity in the company register, tied to the brand and the address.

Register class: Company register — Krajowy Rejestr Sadowy (KRS) — Ministry of Justice open API (companies); CEIDG for sole-trader (jednoosobowa dzialalnosc gospodarcza) practitioners.

ValueAnchor
5Legal entity and registration number published and matched in the register.
4Matched by name.
3Legal entity named; register not accessible.
2Brand only.
1No legal entity found after a full pass (verified conflict → hold H2).

M6 · Self-disclosure of identifiers — weight 10

Whether the clinic itself publishes the numbers needed to re-check it (licences, certificates with issuer). Disclosure is rewarded; a missing number is not a missing licence.

ValueAnchor
5All load-bearing numbers published with issuers.
4Physician numbers published; facility or legal-entity numbers not.
3Partial, without issuers.
2Logos without numbers.
1No identifiers at all.

M7 · Advertising honesty — weight 12

A machine profile of the clinic’s own claims: outcome guarantees, ‘100% safe’, ‘No. 1’ or ‘best’ without an issuer, ‘unlimited grafts’, before/after presented as a promise, foreign boards presented as the national specialist board. Every deduction cites an exact quote with URL, locale and date.

ValueAnchor
5No pattern from the lexicon found.
4One or two soft superlatives.
3Systematic superlatives without guarantees.
2Guarantee or ‘100%’-class statement (bright line; cap candidate).
1Verified fake credential (flag + cap).

M8 · Cross-locale consistency — weight 5

Whether facts agree across the language fronts of the clinic's own site (physician, numbers, accreditations) — a mechanical comparison of extracted fields.

ValueAnchor
5All load-bearing fields agree.
4Spelling discrepancies.
3Some facts appear on only one front.
2A load-bearing fact (physician or number) differs.
1Fronts contradict each other on credentials (H2 candidate).

M9 · Patient documents — weight 5

Presence check for five document classes: informed consent, risks/contraindications, aftercare, revision policy, complaint route. Presence only — the quality of the documents is not assessed.

ValueAnchor
5All five classes published.
4Four.
3Two or three.
2One.
1None.

The formula

Each axis value 1–5 is mapped to 0–1. The composite is the weighted average over the axes that hold a value: axes that are not applicable in this country and axes we could not verify drop out of the normalisation.

composite = 100 × Σ(weight × (value − 1) / 4) / Σ(weight of axes with a value)
score = min(composite + focus adjustment, lowest active ceiling), clamped to 0…100

Coverage threshold: a score is published only when at least 75% of the applicable axis weight holds a sourced value. Below that the record shows 'verification pending' and carries no rank.

Focus adjustment

A mechanical classification from the clinic's own menu.

FocusAdjustment
specialist0
aesthetic in general clinic-2
spa or salon addon-5

Score ceilings

A ceiling is applied only from a verified-false finding — never from 'not found'. Each ceiling is rendered from a fixed template with the exact quote or register entry and its URL; no free text is written about a named clinic.

CeilingMax scoreWhat triggers itFixed wording
Verified false accreditation or licence claim45A claimed accreditation, board certification or licence is contradicted by the official register. Never applied on 'not found' alone.The register {registry} (record dated {date}) does not confirm the credential claimed at {url}: “{quote}”. Under this methodology the score is capped at {cap}. The clinic has been offered a right of reply.
Outcome guarantee or ‘100% safe’-class statement65The clinic's own published text guarantees a result or absolute safety. Applied only with the exact quote.The clinic's own page {url} ({locale}, {date}) states: “{quote}”. Under this methodology an outcome guarantee caps the score at {cap}.
Active sanction in a machine-readable official register45Exists only in countries whose registry map declares a sanctions register. Absence of a sanction is never a finding.Entry in the {registry} register dated {date}: {url}. The score is capped at {cap} and the profile is held pending the clinic's right of reply.

The sanctions ceiling exists only in countries with a machine-readable official sanctions register. In this country: no public register of this class in this country. Absence of a sanction is never a finding.

Holds

Positive verification by default; the hold ladder handles the cases where public records conflict or the physician cannot be identified.

IDHoldEffectFixed wording
H1Clarification requestedprofile provisional, no crownA clarification has been requested from the clinic. The profile is provisional and carries no crown until it is resolved.
H2Material structural conflictceiling after the right-of-reply window (69), 14-day right-of-reply windowPublic records show a material structural conflict ({detail}). After the right-of-reply window the score is capped at {cap}.
H3Responsible physician not identifiablecomposite withheld, unrankedThe responsible physician could not be identified from public sources. The composite score is withheld and the clinic is listed without a rank.

Crowns and procedure slices

A crown is a boolean gate from register-verified axes — never from a clinic's claim. Within a crown, the order is the composite.

CrownMeaningGate
Specialist-ledThe responsible physician holds a current, matching specialist certification in the official register (M1 = 5, official source) and is clearly identifiable (M2 ≥ 4).M1 ≥ 5 (official register) · M2 ≥ 4
Foreign-patient readyThe clinic is verified in the country's official foreign-patient register. Exists only where such a register exists.no such register in this country — this crown does not exist here

Procedure slices list the clinics whose own menu names the procedure (a sourced boolean), ranked by the composite:

Outcome quality

There is no independent measurement of treatment outcomes in this field, and we do not imitate one. The register facts already in the axes are the only quality-adjacent evidence we publish.

How the data is produced (unattended run)

  1. No score without a source — in two passes. A collector records the value, the quote and the URL; a separate verifier reloads the URL and looks for the quote by string match. If the quote is not found, the cell degrades to 'could not verify'.
  2. All negative wording is templated. Ceilings and holds are rendered from fixed strings plus the cited quote or register entry. Nothing free-form is written against a named clinic.
  3. The validator is the build gate. Every axis key must be present (null allowed, absence not), every citation must resolve, ceilings only from verified-false findings with a quote, weights must sum to 100, and superlatives in our own text fail the build.
  4. A checklist per record: at least two independent sources, the register map opened and cited, every axis either a sourced value or an explicit 'could not verify'.
  5. Right of reply without a human in the loop: messages to the contact form or corrections@ are processed as ordinary data input. A correction with a source is applied and logged; a statement without one is published next to the data and the score does not change.

Freshness

Each record shows the real date of its last check. Register axes (M1, M3, M4) are rechecked within 90 days; the advertising axis (M7) within 180 days. Every change is logged in the changelog and in the record's own history.

What this register does not do

Independence: we take no money from clinics, we do not book, we do not refer, and no position can be bought. Data changes only through sourced facts, for every clinic under the same rules.

This site is an independent research project provided 'as is'. Clinic names and public information are used for identification. Nothing here creates a doctor–patient or advisory relationship.

Methodology versions

DateVersionChange
2026-08-29v1.0.0Initial public methodology: nine mechanical axes (M1–M9, weights summing to 100), 1–5 rubric per axis, weighted composite normalised over axes that hold a value, 75% coverage threshold, hold ladder H1–H3, score caps only from verified-false findings, focus penalty, registry-gated crowns.