Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42318376›Full record

ArticleCureus2026

Skin Cancer in the Rural South: Strengthening Dermatologic Training for Frontline Primary Care.

Sarah E Burstein, Howard I Maibach

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sarah E BursteinBrody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, USA.
Howard I MaibachDepartment of Dermatology, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Skin cancer remains a major public health challenge in the rural Southeastern United States (US), where elevated disease burden coincides with limited access to dermatologic care. Rural populations face increased risk due to occupational exposure to ultraviolet light, poverty, lower rates of routine skin screening, and transportation barriers, yet many nonmetropolitan counties have no practicing dermatologists. Consequently, primary care physicians (PCPs) often serve as the first, and sometimes only, clinicians evaluating suspicious skin lesions. Despite this responsibility, dermatology remains underrepresented in undergraduate medical education and primary care training. Because dermatologic diagnosis relies heavily on pattern recognition, morphologic assessment, and familiarity with presentations across diverse skin tones, insufficient training may contribute to delayed recognition of premalignant and malignant lesions, particularly among medically underserved populations. This editorial argues that strengthening dermatologic education within general medical training is a pragmatic and immediately actionable strategy to address workforce maldistribution and reduce rural skin cancer disparities. This is not a proposal for PCPs to replace dermatologists, but rather a call to equip frontline clinicians with the foundational skills needed to recognize, triage, and appropriately manage high-risk dermatologic presentations.

Indexed as

dermatologydermatology educationhealthcare disparitieshealth policymedical educationprimary careprimary care educationrural health disparities

Identifiers

PMID42318376
PMCPMC13274781

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.