Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35347763›Full record

ArticleSkin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI)2022

Comparison of dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy accuracy for the diagnosis of psoriasis and lichen planus.

Zi-Yi Wang, Wen-Min Fei, Cheng-Xu Li, Yong Cui

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. S1 guideline for imaging diagnostics for skin diseases.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Metagenomics reveals unique gut mycobiome biomarkers in psoriasis.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Comparison of dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy accuracy for the diagnosis of psoriasis and lichen planus.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2022
    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.

Zi-Yi WangDepartment of Dermatology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China.
Wen-Min FeiDepartment of Dermatology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China.
Cheng-Xu LiDepartment of Dermatology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yong CuiDepartment of Dermatology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNChina-Japan Friendship Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) as noninvasive tools are gaining increasing importance in the diagnosis of inflammatory skin disorders. The purpose of our study was to calculate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy and RCM in common inflammatory skin diseases. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe retrospectively collected clinical, dermoscopic, and RCM images of psoriasis and lichen planuscases from March 2018 to February 2021 in China-Japan Friendship Hospital. There were 10 experts evaluated dermoscopic and RCM images independently. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predict value, and negative predictive value for each and all investigators were calculated. The diagnostic accuracy was also measured by the area under the curve (AUC) for the Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) Curves.

resultsWe collected 82 psoriasis and 47 lichen planus cases. Dermoscopy was more sensitive than RCM in the diagnosis of psoriasis, and overall diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy was also higher than RCM measured by AUC (0.879 vs. 0.835, p = 0.0001). For lichen planus, RCM had higher sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall diagnostic accuracy than dermoscopy (AUC 0.916 vs. 0.813, p<0.0001).

conclusionDermoscopy and RCM play a significant role in assisting the diagnosis of psoriasis and lichens planus. These two noninvasive diagnostic tools have their own advantages and disadvantages for the evaluation of different inflammatory skin diseases, and they can be combined in clinical practice to improve the accuracy of the diagnosis of inflammatory skin diseases.

Indexed as

Lichen PlanusPsoriasisSkin NeoplasmsDermoscopyHumansMicroscopy, ConfocalRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and Specificitydermoscopylichen planuspsoriasisreflectance confocal microscopy

Identifiers

PMID35347763
PMCPMC9907646
OpenAlexW4221055724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.