SynthesisInternational journal of clinical practice2014
To what extent are current guidelines for cutaneous melanoma follow up based on scientific evidence?
Synthesis in International journal of clinical practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Are American follow-up recommendations in endocrinology actionable? A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.Endocrine · 2021Pooled it
- Quality of biosafety guidelines for dental clinical practice throughout the world in the early COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.Epidemiology and health · 2021Pooled it
- Are clinical practice guidelines for low back pain interventions of high quality and updated? A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Clinical practice guidelines for acute otitis media in children: a systematic review and appraisal of European national guidelines.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- Guideline appraisal with AGREE II: Systematic review of the current evidence on how users handle the 2 overall assessments.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Trial
- User Experiences in a Digital Intervention to Support Total Skin Self-examination by Melanoma Survivors: Nested Qualitative Evaluation Embedded in a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR dermatology · 2023Article
- Experiences of Patient-Led Surveillance, Including Patient-Performed Teledermoscopy, in the MEL-SELF Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR dermatology · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of PET/CT Surveillance Schedules to Detect Distant Recurrence of Resected Stage III Melanoma.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Over half of clinical practice guidelines use non-systematic methods to inform recommendations: A methods study.PloS one · 2021Article
- Short and long-term barriers and facilitators of skin self-examination among individuals diagnosed with melanoma.BMC cancer · 2020Observational
- Development and preliminary validation of the physician support of skin self-examination scale.Primary health care research & development · 2018Article
- A Retrospective Analysis of Surveillance Adherence of Patients after Treatment of Primary Cutaneous Melanoma.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2017Article
- Total skin self-examination at home for people treated for cutaneous melanoma: development and pilot of a digital intervention.BMJ open · 2015Article
- A review of sentinel lymph node biopsy for thin melanoma.Irish journal of medical science · 2015Review
- Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Journal of ophthalmology · 2015Article
- Guideline adherence for the treatment of advanced schistosomiasis japonica in Hubei, China.Parasitology research · 2014Article
- Melanoma patterns of distant relapse: a study of 108 cases from a South Brazilian center.Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical practice guidelines should aim to assist clinicians in making evidence-based choices in the care of their patients. This review attempts to determine the extent of evidence-based support for clinical practice guideline recommendations concerning cutaneous melanoma follow up and to evaluate the methodological quality of these guidelines.
methodsCurrent guidelines providing graded recommendations regarding patient follow up were identified through a systematic literature review. The authors reviewed the evidence base used to formulate recommendations in each of the guidelines and appraised the quality of the guidelines using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) instrument.
resultsMost guideline recommendations concerning the frequency of routine skin examinations by a clinician and the use of imaging and diagnostic tests in the follow up of melanoma patients were based on low-level evidence or consensus expert opinion. Melanoma follow-up guidelines are of variable methodological quality, with some guidelines not recommended by the appraisers for use in clinical practice.
conclusionClinicians should be aware of how scant the evidence base is for many recommended courses of action. As a consequence of the paucity of evidence in the field of melanoma follow up, there is considerable variability in the guidance provided. The variable methodological quality of guidelines for melanoma follow up could be improved by attention to the criteria described in AGREE II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.