SynthesisInternational journal of dermatology2026
Implementation of Total Body Photography for Skin Cancer Early Detection: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in International journal of dermatology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in imaging technologies, such as total body photography (TBP), and the increasing capabilities and use of artificial intelligence (AI) have the potential to enhance skin screening and skin cancer surveillance. However, limited research has examined how these technologies are implemented and integrated into clinical practice across different healthcare settings. This review examined the literature regarding the implementation and utility of TBP technologies over time. A systematic search identified 36 studies published from inception through to July 2025, describing TBP use and reported facilitators and barriers. Specifically, the review mapped TBP workflows, processes, workforce roles, contextual reporting, and evaluation of real-world integration. Findings were synthesized using a narrative synthesis approach due to the heterogeneity in study designs, objectives, and reporting quality. The evidence base was largely implementation light, and no study applied a formal implementation science framework. Thirty-six studies were included because they provided contextual information on TBP use. Only six studies reported any implementation-related aspects, such as the feasibility of replicating TBP protocols across healthcare settings; user perceptions; and the practical use of TBP technologies and/or AI features. Reported technological advancements included digitally enabled and automated systems supporting skin lesion documentation, monitoring, and diagnostic decision-making. Despite these technological shifts, descriptions of TBP work processes remained relatively consistent over time. Several studies reported on the feasibility of healthcare professionals from multiple disciplines to conduct TBP-aided skin examinations. The findings highlight opportunities for TBP technologies to be scaled into a broader range of clinical and potentially resource-constrained settings.
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.