ReviewCancers2025
Teledermatology vs. Face-to-Face Dermatology for the Diagnosis of Melanoma: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evaluating GPT-5 for Melanoma Detection Using Dermoscopic Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCutaneous melanoma is the leading cause of skin cancer-related mortality, and early detection is crucial to improving prognosis. Teledermatology (TD) has increasingly been adopted in melanoma care to address growing demand and limited access to specialists. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the role of TD in the diagnosis and management of suspected melanoma under real-world clinical conditions.
methodsThe review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus up to December 2024. Studies assessing TD use in routine practice were included, focusing on diagnostic accuracy, prognostic indicators, waiting times, satisfaction, and economic outcomes.
resultsTD showed high sensitivity and specificity, particularly when dermoscopic images and expert interpretation were available. Some studies reported reduced Breslow thickness and shorter delays compared to face-to-face care. Overall satisfaction was high among both patients and clinicians. Economic evaluations suggested potential cost savings, although formal analyses were limited. The use of artificial intelligence tools yielded mixed results and was generally perceived with caution in the absence of clinical supervision.
conclusionsTeledermatology appears to be a useful approach for improving access and supporting early diagnosis in melanoma care. Its effectiveness depends on proper implementation and integration into clinical workflows.
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.