ArticleJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM2026
A Primary Care Intervention to Improve Melanoma Detection and Management.
Article in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe incidence of cutaneous melanoma is increasing while access to dermatology care remains limited. Primary care clinicians are poised to identify and triage melanomas. However, barriers exist, including clinician knowledge and confidence. We tested the feasibility of an educational intervention to improve melanoma identification and management in primary care.
methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods pilot feasibility study in two Pacific Northwest primary care clinics caring for underserved populations. Clinicians were invited to participate in educational sessions on skin cancer screening and dermoscopy device use. Qualitative interviews with participating clinicians assessed training experiences. Outcomes measured intervention feasibility, knowledge scores, use of dermatology e-consults, referrals and biopsy rates.
resultsClinicians exposed to the training (n=15) had significant gains in overall knowledge, with primary improvement in lesion identification and biopsy literacy. Referrals for in-person dermatology evaluation significantly decreased for the training-exposed clinicians (16.9 vs. 11.4 per 1000 visits pre, post respectively) whereas the comparison group (n=29) had a small increase (13.8 vs. 14.0 per 1000 visits). General skin check referrals decreased for the exposed group and increased for the comparison group, (p<0.01). Lesion-specific e-consults increased more in the intervention group but did not reach significance (p=0.05). Biopsy rates did not differ significantly. Qualitative findings highlighted training utility, especially image identification review and dermoscopy use.
conclusionsMelanoma education increased the specificity of primary care clinicians' e-consults without increasing in-person dermatology referrals or unnecessary biopsies. While this intervention has promise for improving skin cancer care in primary care, efforts are needed to increase clinician engagement in this education.
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.