Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41236279›Full record

ReviewDermatology practical & conceptual2025

Training Primary Care Practitioners In Dermoscopy Diagnostic Algorithms Enhances Diagnostic Accuracy and Triage of Suspected Skin Cancer: Scoping Review Evidence.

Alexandre Ladet, Sandra Lawton, Michael J Boffa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alexandre LadetDépartement Universitaire de Médecine Générale, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montpellier, France.
Sandra LawtonUniversity of South Wales, UK.
Michael J BoffaUniversity of South Wales, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn many Western countries, access to a dermatologist can be difficult, while the incidence of skin cancer has risen steadily over the past 50 years.

objectiveWe reviewed the published literature to determine whether training primary care practitioners (PCPs) in dermoscopy through brief interventions based on diagnostic algorithms could improve patient care by improving their diagnostic accuracy of suspect lesions.

methodsA scoping review of the literature was conducted, focusing on studies published in the period 2003-2023 that assessed the ability of low-experienced PCPs to triage suspicious dermatological lesions using dermoscopic diagnostic algorithms. Regarding outcomes, we focused on quantitative variables relevant to screening practice in general practice, including sensitivity, specificity, referrals to specialists, and unnecessary lesion excisions.

resultsOf the 926 studies initially identified, 13 were eventually selected: 10 cross-sectional observational studies and three randomized controlled trials. The studies were carried out in North America (N=6), Western Europe (N=4), and Australia (N=3). There was heterogeneity in the training interventions and the criteria used to assess diagnostic accuracy of PCPs after training; however, all studies showed an improvement in this parameter. The preferred algorithms for training PCPs were the 3-point checklist, the 7-point checklist, and the Triage Amalgamated Dermoscopy Algorithm.

conclusionThis review demonstrates the value of training PCPs in dermoscopic diagnostic algorithms through short courses to improve triage of suspicious lesions. However, it is still necessary to define a territorial organization, a precise working framework and limits for PCPs who take on this role.

Identifiers

PMID41236279
PMCPMC12615101

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.