ArticlePreventive medicine reports2018
Psychosocial consequences of skin cancer screening.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of microsimulation models for skin cancer.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Psychological consequences of mammography screening recommendations: a prospective cohort study in Iran.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Screening and novel diagnostic technologies for melanoma: an update.Melanoma management · 2025Review
- Article
- Predictors for psychosocial consequences of screening for liver diseases: A data-driven approach.PloS one · 2025Article
- How do (false) positively screened patients experience a screening programme for liver cirrhosis or fibrosis in Germany? A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Review
- Psychometric properties of the German version of the Psychological Consequences of Screening Questionnaire (PCQ) for liver diseases.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The State of Melanoma: Emergent Challenges and Opportunities.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021Article
- Targeted Melanoma Screening: Risk Self-Assessment and Skin Self-Examination Education Delivered During Mammography of Women.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Screening for melanoma may save lives, but may also cause patient distress. One key reason that preventative visual skin examinations for skin cancer are not currently recommended is the inadequate available evidence to assess potential harm to psychosocial wellbeing. We investigated potential psychological harms and benefits of skin examinations by conducting telephone surveys in 2015 of 187 screened participants; all were ≥35 years old. Participants had their skin examined by practitioners who had completed INFORMED, a validated web-based training for detection of skin cancers, particularly melanoma. Participants underwent the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Psychological Consequences of Screening (PCQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale, and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). Analyses were conducted in 2017. Of the entire study sample, 40% were thoroughly screened as determined by patient-reported level of undress and skin areas examined. Participants who were thoroughly screened: did not differ on negative psychosocial measures; scored higher on measures of positive psychosocial wellbeing (PCQ); and were more motivated to conduct monthly self-examinations and seek annual clinician skin examinations, compared to other participants (
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.