ArticleBMC health services research2025
Assessing skin cancer histopathology reporting against minimum dataset standards in a low-resource setting.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Automated identification of keratinocyte cancers in pathology reports using large language models.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStructured pathology datasets enhance communication and management by improving clarity, completeness, and accuracy. This study aimed to audit pathology reports of skin cancer in Palestine.
methodsComprehensive, time-driven sampling was employed by reviewing all pathology reports of melanoma, basal cell carcinoma (BCC), and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) from January 2021 to December 2024. The data included sociodemographic variables and the core items published in the dataset for the histological reporting of skin cancers by the Royal College of Pathologists. A completion rate of 90% was selected as the standard of measurement.
resultsNone of the included 113 reports documented all items. The macroscopic items were completely reported in 25% and 39.1% of BCC and SCC reports, respectively. For both BCC and SCC, specimen type was reported for all cases, and clinical site was missing in one case of each. The lesion margins were recorded in most reports of BCC (68.7%) and SCC (67.4%). However, macroscopic lesion dimensions were absent in 51.6% of BCC reports and 48.4% of SCC reports. The other items were not mentioned in any report. Only clinical site, specimen type, and the three dimensions of the specimen were included in all melanoma reports. The histopathological subtype was mentioned in only one report.
conclusionsSkin cancer reports did not document most core items. Implementation of standardized reporting is limited by resource constraints and suboptimal health information system. However, transition from narrative to structured reporting requires the development of national regulations and organizational policies, supported by committed leadership. Exploratory research is recommended to identify the barriers to implementation of structured reporting.
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.