ArticleDer Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete2019
[Primary prevention in the context of skin cancer screening].
Article in Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- General practitioners' perspectives on statutory skin cancer screening-A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey in Germany.PloS one · 2024Article
- Incidence and Mortality of Malignant Melanoma in Relation to Dermatologist Density in Bavaria.Advances in therapy · 2021Article
- [Social rights claims for malignant melanoma patients : Providing patient information in German dermatological practices].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe skin cancer screening program in Germany is used for early identification of skin tumours with the aim of a lower-risk removal and avoidance of progression.
objectivesThe aim of the study is to investigate the extent to which skin cancer screening (SCS) has an additional effect on dissemination of information on primary prevention.
methodsThis question was examined from the point of view of screening participants and dermatologists. The proportion of appropriately informed persons among persons who have been screened was determined based on a survey of a representative sample of the German standard population of 1004 persons; the provision of information on primary preventive behaviour was based on a survey of dermatological practices (n = 444). Both surveys were evaluated descriptively.
resultsOf those who underwent SCS (n = 397), the majority (74%) stated that information on protection against UV radiation was provided during the screening. Among dermatologists offering SCS (n = 424), 70% stated that they personally informed all SCS participants about measures preventing skin cancer, and 46% always or predominantly provided written material after conducting SCS.
conclusionIn addition to secondary prevention, SCS also has an important primary preventive function; however there is potential for improvement, since about a quarter of the SCS participants do not receive any information on preventive behaviour from the examining physician. The extent to which this information is actually applied by the SCS participants should be investigated in a longitudinal study.
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.