Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32101302›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2020

Effect of a Skin Self-monitoring Smartphone Application on Time to Physician Consultation Among Patients With Possible Melanoma: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Fiona M Walter, Merel M Pannebakker, Matthew E Barclay, Katie Mills, Catherine L Saunders, Peter Murchie, Pippa Corrie, Per Hall, Nigel Burrows, Jon D Emery

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Attitudes and Behaviors That Impact Skin Cancer Risk among Men.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. [Artificial intelligence and smartphone program applications (Apps) : Relevance for dermatological practice].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2020
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Fiona M WalterThe Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Merel M PannebakkerThe Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Matthew E BarclayThe Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Katie MillsThe Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Catherine L SaundersThe Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Peter MurchieInstitute of Applied Health Science, Centre of Academic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Pippa CorrieCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Per HallCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Nigel BurrowsCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Jon D EmeryThe Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
University of Cambridge · GBCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GBVictorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre · AU

Funding

Department of Health NIHR-CS-012-030
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Melanoma is among the most lethal skin cancers; it has become the fifth most common cancer in the United Kingdom, and incidence rates are rising. Population approaches to reducing incidence have focused on mass media campaigns to promote earlier presentation and potentially improve melanoma outcomes; however, interventions using smartphone applications targeting those with the greatest risk could promote earlier presentation to health care professionals for individuals with new or changing skin lesions. Objective: To study the effect of a commercially available skin self-monitoring (SSM) smartphone application among individuals with increased risk of melanoma on their decision to seek help for changing skin lesions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted in 12 family practices in Eastern England between 2016 and 2017. A total of 238 participants, aged 18 to 75 years and with an increased risk of melanoma, were identified using a real-time melanoma risk assessment tool in family practice waiting rooms. Analysis was intention to treat. Participants were observed for 12 months, and data analysis was conducted from January to August 2018. Intervention: The intervention and control groups received a consultation with standard written advice on sun protection and skin cancer detection. The intervention group had an SSM application loaded on their smartphone and received instructions for use and monthly self-monitoring reminders. Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary outcomes were skin consultation rates with family practice physicians and patient intervals, measured as the time between noticing a skin change and consulting with a family practice clinician. Follow-up questionnaires were sent at 6 and 12 months, and consultation rates were extracted from family practice records. Secondary outcomes included skin self-examination benefits and barriers, self-efficacy for consulting without delay, perceived melanoma risk, sun protection habits, and potential harms. Results: A total of 238 patients were randomized (median [interquartile range] age, 55 [43-65] years, 131 [55.0%] women, 227 [95.4%] white British; 119 [50.0%] randomized to the intervention group). Overall, 51 participants (21.4%) had consultations regarding skin changes during the 12 months of follow-up, and 157 participants (66.0%) responded to at least 1 follow-up questionnaire. There were no significant differences in skin consultation rates (adjusted risk ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.66; P = .89), measures of SSM (adjusted mean difference, 0.08; 95% CI, -0.83 to 1.00; P = .86), or psychological harm (eg, Melanoma Worry Scale: adjusted mean difference, -0.12; 95% CI, -0.56 to 0.31; P = .58). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, recruitment, retention, and initial delivery of the intervention were feasible, and this research provided no evidence of harm from the SSM smartphone application. However, no evidence of benefit on skin self-examination or health care consulting was found, and there is no reason at this stage to recommend its implementation in this population at increased risk of melanoma. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN16061621.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsAdultFemaleHumansMaleMelanomaMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentSelf-ExaminationSkin NeoplasmsSmartphoneTime-to-TreatmentYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32101302
PMCPMC7137684
OpenAlexW3008363739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.