SynthesisBMC public health2025
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on melanoma diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of global evidence.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changing Patterns of Cutaneous Melanoma Mortality in Brazil: A Nationwide Time-Series Analysis (2000-2024).Cureus · 2026Article
- Clinical Characteristics at the Diagnosis of New Primary Melanoma in Italy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study Before and After the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted healthcare systems worldwide. Prioritizing emergency responses resulted in the postponement of routine medical care, including melanoma diagnoses. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the pandemic's effect on diagnosis rates, Breslow thickness, stage at presentation, ulceration, histologic subtypes, and patient age.
methodWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase were searched up to 10 September 2024 for observational studies comparing melanoma outcomes in the pre-COVID era (before March 2020) with the COVID era (March 2020 onwards). Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data on diagnostic counts, patient age, Breslow thickness, ulceration, and histopathological subtype, and assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Random-effects models pooled rate ratios (RRs) or odds ratios (ORs); fixed-effects models pooled mean differences (MDs). Heterogeneity was evaluated with I², and sensitivity analyses were restricted to high-quality studies (NOS ≥ 7).
resultsSixty-two studies (38,676 pre-COVID and 46,846 COVID-era melanomas) met inclusion criteria. New melanoma diagnoses fell by 19% during the pandemic (RR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.86; I² = 98%). Mean age at diagnosis rose by 0.86 years (95% CI 0.58-1.14; I² = 45%). Tumors were thicker (MD = 0.24 mm, 95% CI 0.02-0.47; I² = 92%) and more frequently ulcerated (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.15-1.44; I² = 31%). Nodular melanoma, an aggressive subtype, became more common (OR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.08-1.67; I² = 81%), whereas superficial spreading, acral lentiginous, and lentigo-maligna subtypes showed no significant change. All the key findings persisted in good-quality-only analyses.
conclusionCOVID-19-related service disruptions were associated with fewer melanoma diagnoses but a shift toward older patients and biologically adverse tumor features, signaling delayed detection at the population level. Strengthening resilient, rapid-access skin cancer pathways and integrating tele-dermatology with triaged in-person assessment are public-health priorities for future crises.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number CRD42022361569.
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.