ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025
Sensitivity and Specificity Analysis of Different Lesion Areas of Vitiligo by Reflectance Confocal Microscopy.
Article in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sensitivity and Specificity of Reflectance Confocal Microscopy and Dermoscopy in Assessing Vitiligo Staging.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical diagnosis and staging of vitiligo often rely on the patient's subjective recollection, physician's experience, or clinical evaluation methods. An objective, quantitative diagnostic approach is lacking.
aimsThis study was performed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of different lesion areas and full scanning of lesion areas using reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) for diagnosis and staging of vitiligo.
methodsClinical and RCM data of patients diagnosed with vitiligo were collected. RCM data were gathered from three sites of a lesion: the center of the lesion, the margin of the lesion, and the perilesional normal skin. Scoring was conducted for each method, categorizing the results as either the progressive or stable stage of vitiligo.
resultsThe sensitivity was significantly lower in the perilesional normal skin than at multiple sites (p < 0.001). The specificity was significantly lower in the center of the lesion and at the margin than at multiple sites and significantly higher in the perilesional normal skin than at multiple sites (p < 0.05 for all).
conclusionsThe results of RCM of different lesion areas of vitiligo showed that the rate of missed diagnosis of the progressive stage was lowest in the center of the lesion and comparable to that of multiple sites. The misdiagnosis rate for the stable stage was lowest in the perilesional normal skin, significantly differing from the other sites. Overall, scanning multiple sites yielded the most accurate results, offering flexibility in selection according to the patient's compliance.
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.