Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35665996›Full record

ArticleJournal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG2022

Melanoma care during one year pandemic in Berlin: decreasing appointment cancellations despite increasing COVID-19 concern.

Aleksandra Micek, Katharina Diehl, Miriam Teuscher, Marthe-Lisa Schaarschmidt, Bianca Sasama, Jan Ohletz, Guido Burbach, Felix Kiecker, Uwe Hillen, Wolfgang Harth and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncological care in Germany: rapid review.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023
    Review
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

11 authors.

Aleksandra MicekDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Vivantes Klinikum Spandau, Berlin, Germany.
Katharina DiehlMannheim Institute of Public Health, Social and Preventive Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Miriam TeuscherDepartment of Dermatology and Phlebology, Vivantes Klinikum im Friedrichshain, Berlin, Germany.
Marthe-Lisa SchaarschmidtDepartment of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Bianca SasamaDepartment of Dermatology and Phlebology, Vivantes Klinikum im Friedrichshain, Berlin, Germany.
Jan OhletzDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Vivantes Klinikum Spandau, Berlin, Germany.
Guido BurbachDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Vivantes Klinikum Spandau, Berlin, Germany.
Felix KieckerDepartment of Dermatology and Venereology, Vivantes Klinikum Neukölln, Berlin, Germany.
Uwe HillenDepartment of Dermatology and Venereology, Vivantes Klinikum Neukölln, Berlin, Germany.
Wolfgang HarthDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Vivantes Klinikum Spandau, Berlin, Germany.
Wiebke K PeitschDepartment of Dermatology and Phlebology, Vivantes Klinikum im Friedrichshain, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic poses a great challenge for cancer patients. Our aim was to assess its influence on treatment and appointments of melanoma patients after one year of pandemic.

methodsMelanoma patients treated in the Vivantes Skin Cancer Centre in Berlin, Germany completed a postal survey on pandemic-related alterations in melanoma care. Impact factors on changes of appointments were examined with descriptive analyses and multivariate logistic regression. Data after one year of pandemic were compared to those after its first wave.

resultsAmong 366 participants (57.7 % males; mean age 69.2 years, response rate: 36.1 %), 38 (10.1 %) reported postponed or missed appointments, mostly on their own demand (71.1 %) due to fear of COVID-19 (52.6 %). Current treatment was associated with a lower risk of changing appointments (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.194, p = 0.002), higher age (OR: 1.037, p = 0.039), longer disease duration (OR: 1.007, p = 0.028), and higher school degree (OR: 2.263, p = 0.043) with higher probability. Among 177 patients currently receiving therapy, only 1.7 % experienced pandemic-related treatment alterations. Concern about COVID-19 was significantly higher after one year of pandemic than after its first wave, but the number of missed appointments was lower.

conclusionsPandemic-related changes were rare in our cohort and decreased over time despite increasing concern.

Indexed as

COVID-19MelanomaAgedAppointments and SchedulesBerlinFemaleHumansMalePandemics

Identifiers

PMID35665996
PMCPMC9348098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.