Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25013535›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology2014

Diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in melanoma.

David Weinstein, Jennifer Leininger, Carl Hamby, Bijan Safai

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 103 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
103citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

103 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 165 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. AnInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

43 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

David WeinsteinDepartment of Dermatology.
Jennifer LeiningerDepartment of Dermatology.
Carl HambyDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, New York Medical College, New York and Valhalla, New York.
Bijan SafaiDepartment of Dermatology.
New York Medical College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Melanoma is a lethal melanocytic neoplasm. Unfortunately, the histological diagnosis can be difficult at times. Distinguishing ambiguous melanocytic neoplasms that are benign nevi from those that represent true melanoma is important both for treatment and prognosis. Diagnostic biomarkers currently used to assist in the diagnosis of melanoma are usually specific only for melanocytic neoplasms and not necessarily for their ability to metastasize. Traditional prognostic biomarkers include depth of invasion and mitotic count. Newer diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers utilize immunohistochemical staining as well as ribonucleic acid, micro-ribonucleic acid, and deoxyribonucleic acid assays and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Improved diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers are of increasing importance in the treatment of melanoma with the development of newer and more targeted therapies. Herein, the authors review many of the common as well as newer diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers used in melanoma.

Identifiers

PMID25013535
PMCPMC4086529
OpenAlexW1687945972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.