ReviewCancers2024
Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Delay of Melanoma Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Teledermoscopy-Assisted Referral for Cutaneous Melanoma: Diagnostic Timeliness, Histopathologic Severity, and Stage at Excision in a Comparative Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Teledermatology and Teledermoscopy for Melanoma Care Pathways: Timeliness, Diagnostic Performance, and Stage at Diagnosis: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Patients, antibiotics andJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2025Article
- Indirect Impact of Pandemic on the Diagnosis of New Primary Melanoma: A Retrospective, Multicenter Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSeveral studies have described how the restrictive measures due to COVID-19 have delayed melanoma diagnoses, resulting in an increased rate of more severe cases. Summarizing the sparse results in this context might help to understand the real impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on melanoma. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate how the clinical and prognostic factors of new melanoma diagnoses changed after COVID-19.
methodsA literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus was conducted in September 2023. We included studies published in peer-reviewed journals reporting histopathological data on new diagnoses of cutaneous melanoma in adult patients during and/or after the lockdown compared to those diagnosed before the COVID-19 pandemic. A meta-analysis was conducted utilizing a random effects model. The between-study heterogeneity was assessed via Higgins's I
resultsThe study included 45 articles. We found a significantly higher proportion of all factors indicating worse prognosis in the post-lockdown period compared to the pre-COVID-19 phase, including high thickness (SOR = 1.14, 95%CI 1.08-1.20 for 1-2 mm; SOR = 1.62, 95%CI 1.08-2.40, for >2 mm), the presence of ulcerations (SOR = 1.35, 95%CI 1.18-1.54), nodular subtype (SOR = 1.19, 95%CI 1.07-1.32), the presence of mitosis (SOR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.17-2.11), and stage III (SOR = 1.39, 95%CI 1.19-1.52) and IV (SOR = 1.44, 95%CI 1.26-1.63). Limitations include the limited studies' geographical distribution and moderate heterogeneity affecting meta-analysis estimates.
conclusionsOur meta-analysis provided evidence of more advanced melanomas diagnosed in the post-COVID-19 pandemic period, emphasizing the importance of creating and updating pandemic preparedness plans to limit the impact of any future events on oncological care.
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.