ArticleInternational journal of dermatology2026
The Impact of Clinical and Dermoscopic Photographs on the Diagnostic Accuracy of Remote Optical Coherence Tomography Assessment for Basal Cell Carcinoma Detection: A Comparative Diagnostic Study.
Article in International journal of dermatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06273709 (The Value of Visual Inspection When Remotely Diagnosing Basal Cell Carcinoma on Optical Coherence Tomography Scans), which is not on this 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.
The Value of Visual Inspection When Remotely Diagnosing Basal Cell Carcinoma on Optical Coherence Tomography Scans: a Diagnostic Case-control Study
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRemote assessment of optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) detection enhances access to OCT-guided dermatologic care, but prohibits direct lesion inspection. The value of clinical and dermoscopic photographs when remotely assessing OCT scans remains unknown. The objective was to evaluate the impact of leaving out clinical and dermoscopic photographs on the diagnostic accuracy of remote OCT assessment. The primary question was whether an unacceptable decrease in specificity (≥ 10%) could be excluded when photographs are not provided.
methodsIn a diagnostic study, four OCT assessors assessed 120 scans of clinically equivocal lesions suspect for BCC with an indication for biopsy. Assessments were initially conducted without photographs, after which cases were shuffled and reassessed alongside photographs. Assessors expressed diagnostic certainty on a five-point confidence scale. Only certainty about BCC presence and its subtype was considered a positive test result. Histopathology served as the reference standard.
resultsAssessment without photographs led to a change of specificity ranging from -1.7% to +6.7%. According to the lower limits of the one-sided 95% confidence interval around the changes, a decrease of more than 10% could be excluded. Sensitivity decreased in three of the four assessors.
conclusionsLeaving out photographs does not compromise specificity, and in this respect it is considered non-inferior to remote OCT assessment with photographs. However, assessment with photographs increases the proportion of BCCs detected and is therefore recommended.
trial registrationNCT06273709.
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.