ArticlePeerJ2026
Skin cancer prevalence among outdoor activity participants from Queensland, Australia: aquatic
Article in PeerJ, 2026. 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.
- Self-skin Examination for Skin Cancer Detection in High-risk Populations: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study and Implications for Cancer Education.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To determine the prevalence of keratinocyte cancer and melanoma among people conducting aquatic and non-aquatic outdoor activities, and their associated ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposures. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study incorporating a survey and total body skin cancer screen. There were 1,403 participants attending a specialized skin cancer-focused general practice during the period of September 2021 to August 2024. The main outcomes measured were the point prevalence of pre-cancerous skin lesions, keratinocyte cancers (KC) ( Results: Of 1,403 participants (739 women, 664 men), 512 were identified as aquatic and 891 were identified as non-aquatic. Among aquatic participants, 98 of 512 (19.1%) participants were diagnosed with BCC, compared with 142 of 891 (15.9%) non-aquatic participants. Regarding SCC in the population, 46 of 512 (9.0%) aquatic participants were diagnosed compared with 89 of 891 (10.0%) non-aquatic participants. For melanoma (MM), 48 out of 512 (9.4%) aquatic participants were diagnosed and 48 of 891 (5.4%) non-aquatic participants, resulting in an odds ratio nearly double (1.8 times) for aquatic participants compared with non-aquatic. Participants of increased age and male gender had an increased likelihood of being diagnosed with MM. Primary locations for KC were the head, face and neck (32% aquatic, 36% non-aquatic), which differed for MM, being primarily located on the back (40% aquatic, 37% non-aquatic). Conclusions: While the prevalence of BCC and SCC was similar across activity groups, aquatic participants demonstrated a significantly higher prevalence of MM, despite reporting lower cumulative lifetime UV exposure. A higher MM risk is likely attributable to greater participant engagement during peak ultraviolet radiation (UVR) hours. These findings underscore the need for skin cancer surveillance in aquatic enthusiasts, who should be recognised as a high-risk population within the national melanoma screening framework.
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.