|
Volumn 148, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 1272-1273
|
Why digital follow-up of dermoscopically equivocal pigmented lesions should be discouraged [3]
|
Author keywords
[No Author keywords available]
|
Indexed keywords
CANCER DIAGNOSIS;
CLINICAL EXAMINATION;
DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE;
EPILUMINESCENCE MICROSCOPY;
FOLLOW UP;
HIGH RISK PATIENT;
HUMAN;
LETTER;
MALPRACTICE;
MEDICAL PRACTICE;
MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT;
MELANOMA;
PHOTOGRAPHY;
PIGMENT DISORDER;
PRIORITY JOURNAL;
RISK ASSESSMENT;
SIMULATION;
SKIN SURGERY;
ADULT;
DERMATOLOGY;
DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL;
FEMALE;
HUMANS;
MELANOMA;
NEVUS, PIGMENTED;
SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;
SKIN NEOPLASMS;
|
EID: 0038684938
PISSN: 00070963
EISSN: None
Source Type: Journal
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2133.2003.05363.x Document Type: Letter |
Times cited : (4)
|
References (8)
|