ArticleDermatology practical & conceptual2025
Two-step-7-Pink Rule: A Practical Tool for the Dermoscopic Evaluation of Fully Amelanotic Skin Lesions.
Article in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 2025. 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.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe diagnosis of fully amelanotic skin tumors is difficult on clinical and dermoscopic examination.
objectivesWe sought to identify an accurate and user-friendly dermoscopic algorithm to differentiate between benign and malignant pink lesions.
methodsThe database of 1 referral center was retrospectively reviewed for images of non-inflammatory fully amelanotic skin lesions. Two dermatologists jointly assessed a validation set of images for dermoscopic criteria and constructed a diagnostic algorithm, the 2-step-7-pink rule (2S-7PR). Two external clinicians, with different skills in dermoscopy and blinded to the final diagnosis, separately evaluated images from the validation test sets using the prevalent criterion method and the new 2S-7PR algorithm.
resultsA total of 763 lesions from 652 patients were included in the validation set database, of which 68.3% were malignant and 31.7% were benign. Three suspicious dermoscopic criteria were included in the first step of the 2S-7PR: polymorphous or sharply focused vessels, scales or crusts, and erosions or ulcerations; and 4 non-suspicious criteria were included in the second: white collarette, white scar-like area, vascular lacunae, and necklace pinpoint vessels. High levels of specificity and sensitivity were calculated in the validation and test phases for both the expert and non-expert evaluators, the former achieving higher levels of both sensitivity and specificity by employing the 2S-7PR compared to the prevalent method, and the latter only improved specificity.
conclusionsThe present study showed that an algorithm focused on a few reproducible and easily recognizable criteria could improve diagnostic accuracy in the management of amelanotic lesions.
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.