Observational studyJAMA dermatology2022
Five-Year Outcomes of a Melanoma Screening Initiative in a Large Health Care System.
Observational study in JAMA dermatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.
- New Primary and Secondary Prevention Measures for Cutaneous Melanoma: A Systematic Review.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Overdiagnosis of Melanoma In Situ.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Predicting Melanoma Impact on the Swedish Healthcare System from the Adult Population Using Machine Learning on Registry Data.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2026Article
- Impact of Dermatologic Screening and Methods on Breslow Thickness in Melanoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- Clinicopathological features and ethnic disparities of melanoma in the United Arab Emirates: 2017-2025.PloS one · 2026Article
- Diverging Incidence and Mortality of Cutaneous Melanoma in Mainland China, 1990-2023, with Projections to 2030: A Global Burden of Disease 2023 Analysis.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
- Melanoma Severity at Presentation and Prior Skin Cancer Screening: A Survey Study of Surgical Oncology Patients.Journal of skin cancer · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic Influences on Melanoma Incidence Patterns by Stage in the US.Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Screening and novel diagnostic technologies for melanoma: an update.Melanoma management · 2025Review
- Circulating MicroRNAs: functional biomarkers for melanoma prognosis and treatment.Molecular cancer · 2025Review
- Incidence of melanoma in situ among racial and ethnic minorities in the United States.JAAD international · 2025Article
- Acral Melanoma Incidence and Survival Trends in 1990-2020: A Nationwide, Population-based Study.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2024Article
- Skin health of community-living older people: a scoping review.Archives of dermatological research · 2024Article
- Site-specific patterns of early-stage cancer diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2024Article
- The benefit of early-stage diagnosis: A registry-based survey evaluating the quality of life in patients with melanoma.Skin health and disease · 2023Article
- The effects of exposure to solar radiation on human health.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2023Article
- Opportunities to inform German residents about the possibility of skin cancer screening and to inform stakeholders to take appropriate actions: A qualitative approach.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Advances in Early Detection of Melanoma and the Future of At-Home Testing.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Acceptability and appropriateness of a risk-tailored organised melanoma screening program: Qualitative interviews with key informants.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Population-based skin cancer screening is currently not recommended owing to lack of data to quantify the balance of benefits and harms. Objective: To compare thickness-specific incidence of melanoma in screened vs unscreened patients following the initiation of a primary care-based skin cancer screening initiative. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study of a quality improvement initiative was conducted from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2018, among patients 35 years and older presenting for a primary care visit at primary care practices within an academic and community-based health care system during the study period. Data analysis was performed January 2020 to January 2022. Interventions: Primary care clinicians were offered training in melanoma identification through skin examination and encouraged to offer annual screening to patients 35 years and older. Main Outcomes and Measures: Thickness of melanomas diagnosed in screened and unscreened patients. Results: Among 595 799 analyzed screen-eligible patients, 144 851 (24.3%) were screened at least once. Screened patients were older (median [IQR] age, 59 [49-67] vs 55 [45-66] years) and more likely to be female (82 244 [56.8%] vs 250 806 [55.6%]; P < .001) and non-Hispanic White (124 747 [86.1%] vs 375 890 [83.4%]; P < .001) than unscreened patients. After adjusting for age, sex, and race, screened patients were more likely than unscreened patients to be diagnosed with in situ (incidence, 30.4 vs 14.4; hazard ratio [HR], 2.6; 95% CI, 2.1-3.1; P < .001) or thin invasive (≤1 mm) melanoma (incidence, 24.5 vs 16.1; HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.2; P < .001). Screened patients were also more likely than unscreened patients to be diagnosed with in situ (incidence, 26.7 vs 12.9; HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.7-2.6; P < .001) or thin invasive (≤1 mm) interval melanomas (melanoma diagnosed at least 60 days after initial screening examination) (incidence, 18.5 vs 14.4; HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.7; P = .03). Incidence of melanoma thicker than 4 mm in unscreened and screened patients, respectively, was 3.3 and 2.7 (HR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.4-1.4; P = .38) for all melanomas and 2.7 and 1.5 (HR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.2-1.2; P = .15) for interval melanomas. Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, primary care-based melanoma screening was associated with increased detection of thin melanoma, raising concern about overdiagnosis. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to determine the influence of screening on the incidence of thick melanoma and outcomes associated with high costs and poor outcomes, such as metastasis.
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.