ArticleCureus2026
Outcomes of Risk-Stratified Face-to-Face and Teledermoscopy Pathways for Skin Lesion Referrals: A Retrospective Service Evaluation.
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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSkin cancer referrals to secondary care continue to rise, and teledermoscopy has been incorporated into NHS urgent suspected cancer (USC) pathways to support triage. Direct comparisons of outcomes across deliberately risk-stratified face-to-face (FTF) and teledermoscopy referral pathways, within the same service, time period, and assessing consultant, remain limited.
methodsWe retrospectively compared outcomes across two risk-stratified referral pathways within the same dermatology service over a six-month period (July-December 2025): 201 patients with 207 index lesions assessed via FTF clinics, and 378 patients with 415 lesions assessed via teledermoscopy. All patients were reviewed by the same dermoscopy-trained consultant. Referral urgency, initial clinical impression, clinic outcome, and histology were recorded. The two pre-specified headline outcomes - discharge rate and malignancy yield - are reported as absolute differences between pathways with 95% confidence intervals; all other between-cohort comparisons are descriptive/exploratory and were not adjusted for multiplicity.
resultsFTF referrals were predominantly USC referrals (175/201, 87.0%), with a malignancy yield of 57/207 index lesions (27.5%). The discharge rate was 72/201 patients (35.8%), and 116/201 patients (57.7%) required minor operative procedures. Teledermoscopy referrals were more evenly distributed across urgency categories, with 193/378 patients (51.1%) referred as USC. Malignancy yield, excluding in situ disease, was 60/415 lesions (14.5%), 13.1 percentage points lower than FTF (95% CI: 6.1-20.0); including in situ disease, yield was 63/415 (15.2%), a difference of 13.8 percentage points (95% CI: 6.7-20.9) The discharge rate at initial assessment was 206/378 patients (54.5%), 18.7 percentage points higher than FTF (95% CI: 10.4-27.0). Basal cell carcinoma was the leading confirmed malignancy in both pathways. Incidental lesions were identified in 25/201 FTF assessments (12.4%), of which 24/25 (96.0%) were skin cancers, predominantly basal cell carcinomas.
conclusionsWithin the same service and assessing consultant, teledermoscopy was associated with a substantially higher discharge rate while still detecting skin cancers across referral categories. Much of this difference likely reflects image-based triage allocating lower-suspicion referrals to teledermoscopy, rather than a difference in diagnostic performance between the two modalities; these findings should be interpreted as a descriptive evaluation of pathway throughput rather than a head-to-head comparison of diagnostic accuracy. These findings support the continued, risk-stratified integration of teledermoscopy into NHS skin cancer referral pathways.
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.