Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37222796›Full record

ArticleArchives of dermatological research2023

Exploring knowledge gaps in the understanding of peripheral and deep en face margin assessment.

Kimberly A Sable, Kyle E Rudningen, Michael R Lasarev, Yaohui G Xu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of dermatological research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Kimberly A SableDepartment of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin, One S. Park St., Floor 7, Madison, WI, 53715, USA.
Kyle E RudningenDepartment of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin, One S. Park St., Floor 7, Madison, WI, 53715, USA.
Michael R LasarevDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, 610 Walnut Street, Madison, WI, 53726, USA.
Yaohui G XuDepartment of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin, One S. Park St., Floor 7, Madison, WI, 53715, USA. yxu@dermatology.wisc.edu.

Funding

University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR002373 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI ELIZABETH S BURNSIDE, Allan R. Brasier · 2017 to 2026
$75.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002373NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR002373
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2022, National Comprehensive Cancer Network updated the phrase of "complete circumferential peripheral and deep margin assessment (CCPDMA)" to "peripheral and deep en face margin assessment (PDEMA)," which was meant to create more consistency across all treatment modalities and provide clarity to the meaning of total margin evaluation. The aim of this project was to investigate the interpretation of PDEMA across pertinent specialties and to identify any existing knowledge gaps in hopes of improving clinical performance of institutional practice. An electronic survey was administered to medical professionals within the divisions of dermatology and otolaryngology retrieving demographic data and assessing respondents' knowledge on tissue processing techniques and PDEMA. Of the four knowledge-based assessment questions administered, dermatology respondents answered three questions with > 80% accuracy and one question with < 65% accuracy. Otolaryngology respondents answered one question with > 80% accuracy and three with < 65% accuracy. Both groups answered the knowledge-based question evaluating the concept of "what must be true for Mohs or PDEMA to have value" with under 65% accuracy. When comparing dermatology and otolaryngology respondents, only one question which evaluated the proper methods to "achieve processing of the epidermal edge and the base of the tumor along a single plane in the lab" significantly differed between groups, with a percentage correct of 96% for dermatologists compared to 54% for otolaryngologists (p < 0.001). Results were found to be similar when resident physicians were removed from analysis. The overall percent correct for knowledge-based questions was shifted higher for dermatologists compared to otolaryngologists (p = 0.014). This trend was also redemonstrated when analyzing the data excluding residents (p = 0.053).

Indexed as

Basal Cell CarcinomaOtolaryngologySkin NeoplasmsHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesCutaneous oncologyMohs micrographic surgeryNCCN Clinical Practice GuidelinesPeripheral and deep en face margin assessment (PDEMA)Skin cancer

Identifiers

PMID37222796

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.