ReviewCureus2025
Resource Management Challenges in Rural Dermatological Care: A Mapping Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skin cancer prevalence in the United States is rapidly on the rise, particularly in rural communities where individuals are subjected to heavy sunlight exposure through occupations such as agricultural work and construction. These geographic regions are often lacking in dermatologic specialty care, thus increasing the disease burden of skin conditions in primary care settings. Access barriers to specialized dermatology care are exacerbated by prolonged wait times to schedule an appointment, travel demands, and a relative paucity of dermatology providers in rural areas as compared to urban areas. In rural communities, the high burden of skin diseases, the logistical challenges, and the shortage of dermatologists lead to increased reliance on primary care physicians (PCPs) for dermatological care. This review aims to identify barriers to dermatology care in rural communities, understand challenges faced by PCPs related to dermatological management, and explore modalities that are currently being used to streamline clinical workflows for PCPs. Dermatology training for PCPs consists primarily of pre-clinical exposure to the field, and it has been reported that there is a relative lack of opportunity for training to further enhance postgraduate dermatology knowledge. Recent studies demonstrate that novel educational and infrastructural support to primary care clinics has had substantial positive impacts on the ability of primary caregivers to provide accurate, cost-effective dermatologic care in addressing skin conditions, as well as increasing diagnostic confidence. Regular skin examinations, dermoscopy, and digital transformation of images are also shown to improve detection and diagnostic accuracy. Interventions like the use of smartphones, teledermatology, and dermoscopy show potential for improving care but must be thoroughly evaluated for effectiveness before widespread adoption in primary care settings.
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.