ArticleDermatology and therapy2026
Ultraviolet-Induced Fluorescence Dermoscopy for the Differentiation of Non-Pigmented Malignant and Benign Lesions on the Face.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is increasing evidence suggesting that ultraviolet-induced fluorescence dermoscopy (UVFD) may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of various skin entities. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of UVFD for visualizing the discriminative features of the most common non-pigmented tumors of the face, including basal cell carcinoma (BCC), dermal nevus (DN), sebaceous hyperplasia (SebH), and seborrheic keratosis (SebK).
methodsA total of 181 lesions were examined using polarized dermoscopy (PD) and UVFD. For assessment, established dermato-oncologic criteria for PD, as well as previously defined and newly observed features for UVFD, were used.
resultsThe most common UVFD findings in BCCs were dark silhouettes (84.48%), interrupted follicle patterns (54.83%), arborizing vessels (54.83%), and well-demarcated borders (41.93%). DNs exhibited dark silhouettes (72.72%), interrupted follicle patterns (66.66%), and well-demarcated borders (54.54%). SebHs presented with punctate pink central fluorescence (43.63%) and 2-3 central plugs with or without fluorescence (36.36%). SebK showed well-defined borders (70.96%), white-blue fluorescence at the ridge edges (41.93%), and an interrupted follicle pattern (41.93%). Several UVFD features were indicative of specific entities, such as black globules, which are characteristic of BCC, central plugs or punctate pink central fluorescence (SebH), and white-blue fluorescence at the ridges or warty surface (SebK). However, other findings, such as an interrupted follicular pattern or absence of follicular fluorescence, were common across lesions and did not allow for differentiation.
conclusionThe study offers new insights into the presentation of non-pigmented facial lesions under UVFD, with several features indicative of particular entities. Incorporating this method into daily practice may improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce unnecessary biopsies.
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.