ArticleDermatology reports2023
Agreement on classification of clinical photographs of pigmentary lesions: exercise after a training course with young dermatologists.
Article in Dermatology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 9 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smartphone apps may help promoting the early diagnosis of melanoma. The reliability of specialist judgment on lesions should be assessed. Hereby, we evaluated the agreement of 6 young dermatologists, after a specific training. Clinical judgment was evaluated during 2 online sessions, 1 month apart, on a series of 45 pigmentary lesions. Lesions were classified as highly suspicious, suspicious, non-suspicious or not assessable. Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa were used to calculate intra- and inter-rater agreement. The overall intra-rater agreement was 0.42 (95% confidence interval - CI: 0.33-0.50), varying between 0.12-0.59 on single raters. The inter-rater agreement during the first phase was 0.29 (95% CI: 0.24-0.34). When considering the agreement for each category of judgment, kappa varied from 0.19 for not assessable to 0.48 for highly suspicious lesions. Similar results were obtained in the second exercise. The study showed a less than satisfactory agreement among young dermatologists. Our data point to the need for improving the reliability of the clinical diagnoses of melanoma especially when assessing small lesions and when dealing with thin melanomas at a population level.
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.