ArticleCurrent health sciences journal
The Importance of Dermoscopy in Early Recognition of Melanoma in Situ.
Article in Current health sciences journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early recognition of melanoma in situ (MIS) is an ongoing challenge in dermatology. It rarely arises 'de novo', most frequently resulting due to the transformation of an atypical nevus. The diagnostic criteria for MIS are diverse dermoscopy being the most used and it has a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 69% in detecting melanomas. The main objective of our study was to establish the sensitivity and the specificity of each of the 7-point checklist criteria used to differentiate melanocytic nevi from in situ malignant melanoma. The study group included 200 patients, aged over 18 years, with atypical pigmentary nevi after clinical aspects that presented changes in clinical appearance (shape, color, dimensions) during the last 6 months. On each patient we used the 7-point checklist of Argenziano (C1-C7). The study was performed at the Medical Center Dr. Ianosi, in Craiova between January 2016 and September 2018 and it was used Molemax HD computerized dermatoscope. The C1÷C3 criteria are significantly relevant in establishing the diagnosis of MIS in comparison with the diagnosis of nevus, unlike the C4-C7 criterion that is not definitely relevant for confirmation of the MIS diagnosis. There are no enough specific dermoscopic criteria to differentiate MIS from atypical nevus.
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.