Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32761987›Full record

Trial reportCancer medicine2020

Remote skin self-examination training of melanoma survivors and their skin check partners: A randomized trial and comparison with in-person training.

June K Robinson, Racheal Reavy, Kimberly A Mallett, Rob Turrisi

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02854657 (A Comparison of Interventions to Teach Patients Skin Self-examination), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

NCT02854657 nacompletednot on this map

A Comparison of Interventions to Teach Patients Skin Self-examination

TypeinterventionalSponsorNorthwestern UniversityRan2016 to 2021Enrolled682ConditionsMelanomaArmsSkin Self- examination structured training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Follow-up of primary melanoma patients with high risk of recurrence: recommendations based on evidence and consensus.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

June K RobinsonDepartment of Dermatology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2331-3352
Racheal ReavyBiobehavioral Health and Prevention Research Center, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Kimberly A MallettBiobehavioral Health and Prevention Research Center, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Rob TurrisiBiobehavioral Health and Prevention Research Center, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Pennsylvania State University · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

A comparison of interventions to teach patients skin self-examinationR01CA154908 · NCI · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI ROBINSON, JUNE K · 2011 to 2019
$5.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA154908
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCompared with other cancers, melanoma has the longest delays measured as the median time to patient presentation for care from symptom onset. Time to presentation for care is a key determinant of outcomes, including disease stage, prognosis, and treatment.

methodsMelanoma survivors with localized disease and their skin check partners enrolled in two sequential randomized control trials of skin self-examination (SSE) training. In Phase 1, the pair read a workbook in the office and had quarterly total body skin examinations with a study dermatologist. In Phase 2, materials were mailed to pairs, whose surveillance was with a community physician. SSE knowledge, performance (frequency and extent), and identification of concerning moles were compared between phases.

resultsAmong 341 patients, 197 received the workbook and the others were controls. Knowledge in performing SSE was higher for the workbook relative to controls in both phases. The SSE frequency ranged from 2.38 to 5.97 times in 9 months. Patients randomized to the workbook in both phases performed significantly more SSE than controls at 9 months (P < .05). In both phases, trained survivors performed significantly more SSEs on the scalp than controls at 9 and 18 months (P < .05). Phase 1 survivors performed significantly more SSEs on the abdomen, buttocks, and soles of the feet than controls, but this did not occur in Phase 2. Finally, in both phases, survivors trained with the workbook resulted in greater detection of suspicious lesions and melanomas.

conclusionsThese findings justify the benefits of remote SSE training for patients as an adjunct to provider-administered screening.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsEarly Detection of CancerPatient Education as TopicSelf-ExaminationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiopsyDermatologistsFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMelanomaMiddle AgedOffice Visitsmelanoma survivorsremote trainingskin self-examination

Identifiers

PMID32761987
PMCPMC7541148
OpenAlexW3048066238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.