Observational studyJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2021
Melanoma Diagnostic Practices of French-Speaking Belgian General Practitioners and the Prospective Study of Their Pigmented Skin Lesion Diagnostic Accuracy and Management.
Observational study in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of skin biopsy practices: A comprehensive nationwide study on skin cancer and melanoma biopsies.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025Article
- Improving Skin Cancer Diagnostics Through a Mobile App With a Large Interactive Image Repository: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR dermatology · 2023Article
- Melanoma Detection by Non-Specialists: An Untapped Potential for Triage?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Dermoscopy use in primary care: a qualitative study with general practitioners.BMC primary care · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
General practitioners (GPs) are among the main actors involved in early melanoma diagnosis. However, melanoma diagnostic accuracy and management are reported to be insufficient among GPs in Europe. The primary aim of this observational prospective study was to shed light on melanoma diagnostic practices among French-speaking Belgian GPs. The second aim was to specifically analyse these GPs' pigmented skin lesion diagnostic accuracy and management. GPs from the five French-speaking districts of Belgium were asked to complete a questionnaire, before taking part in a melanoma diagnostic training session. First, we assessed the GPs' current melanoma diagnostic practices. Then, their pigmented skin lesion diagnostic accuracy and management were evaluated, through basic theoretical questions and clinical images. These results were subsequently analysed, according to the GPs' sociodemographic characteristics and medical practice type. In total, 89 GPs completed the questionnaire. Almost half of the GPs (43%; CI = [33;54]) were confronted with a suspicious skin lesion as the main reason for consultation once every 3 months, while 33% (CI = [24;43]) were consulted for a suspicious lesion as a secondary reason once a month. Prior to training, one-third of the GPs exhibited suboptimal diagnostic accuracy in at least one of six "life-threatening" clinical cases among two sets of 10 clinical images of pigmented skin lesions, which can lead to inadequate patient management (i.e. incorrect treatment and/or inappropriate reinsurance). This study underlines the need to train GPs in melanoma diagnosis. GPs' pigmented skin lesion diagnostic accuracy and management should be improved to increase early melanoma detection.
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.