To excise or not: Impact of MelaFind on German dermatologists' decisions to biopsy atypical lesions;Exzidieren oder nicht: Auswirkung von MelaFind auf Biopsie-Entscheidungen atypischer Läsionen bei deutschen Dermatologen

JDDG - Journal of the German Society of Dermatology

Volumn 12, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 606-614

  Hauschild, Axel ^a   Chen, Suephy C ^b   Weichenthal, Michael ^a   Blum, Andreas ^c   King, Hadley C ^d,e   Goldsmith, Jeff ^f   Scharfstein, Daniel ^g   Gutkowicz Krusin, Dina ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN   (Germany)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Private and Teaching Practice of Dermatology   (Germany)

^d WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^e MELA Sciences Inc   (United States)

^f Columbia Mailman School of Public Health ^*  (United States)

^g JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DERMATOLOGIST; DERMATOSCOPE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MELANOMA; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SKIN BIOPSY; SKIN DEFECT; SKIN PIGMENTATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; UNITED STATES; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DECISION MAKING; DERMATOLOGY; DEVICE FAILURE ANALYSIS; DEVICES; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EPILUMINESCENCE MICROSCOPY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; GERMANY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SKIN NEOPLASMS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; DERMATOLOGY; DERMOSCOPY; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMANS; MALE; MELANOMA; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SKIN NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84903979245     PISSN: 16100379     EISSN: 16100387     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ddg.12362     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Garbe C, Leiter U. Melanoma epidemiology and trends. Clinics in Dermatology 2009; 27: 3-9.
2. Garbe C, Blum A. Epidemiology of cutaneous melanoma in Germany and worldwide. Skin PhArmacol Appl Skin Physiol 2001; 14: 280-90.
3. Robert Koch Institute (ed.). Cancer in Germany, 2003-2004. Incidence and Trends. Sixth edition. Robert Koch Institute (ed.) and Association of Population-based Cancer Registries in Germany (ed.). Berlin, 2008.
4. Rigel DS, Friedman RJ, Kopf AW et al. ABCDE: an evolving concept in the early detection of melanoma. Arch Dermatol 2005; 141 (8): 1032-4.
5. Tsao H, Atkins MB, Sober AJ. Management of cutaneous melanoma. N Engl J Med 2004; 351 (10): 998-1012.
6. Friedman RJ, Gutkowicz-Krusin D, Farber MJ et al. The diagnostic performance of expert dermoscopists vs a computer-vision system on small-diameter melanomas. Arch Dermatol 2008; 144(4); 476-82.
7. Monheit G, Cognetta AB, Ferris L et al. The performance of Mela Find: a prospective multicenter study. Arch Dermatol 2011; 147(2): 188-94.
8. Blum A, Zalaudek I, Argenziano G. Digital image analysis for diagnosis of skin tumours. Sem Cutan Med Surg 2008; 27: 11-5.
9. Shapiro M, James WD, Kessler R et al. Comparison of skin biopsy triage decisions in 49 patients with pigmented lesions and skin neoplasms: store-and-forward teledermatology vs face-to-face dermatology. Arch Dermatol 2004; 140(5): 525-8.
10. Warshaw EM, Lederle FA, Grill JP et al. Accuracy of teledermatology for pigmented neoplasms. J Am Acad Dermatol 2009; 61(5): 753-65.
11. Chen SC, Pennie ML, Kolm P et al. Diagnosing and managing cutaneous pigmented lesions: primary care physicians versus dermatologists. J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21 (7): 678-82.
12. Argenziano G, Soyer HP, Chimenti S et al. Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions: results of a consensus meeting via the internet. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003; 48(5): 679-93.
13. Chen S. Protocol 20063: Survey Study - Comparison of diagnostic and biopsy/referral sensitivity to melanoma between three groups of physicians and Mela Find®. Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. Publication upcoming; 2013.
14. Carlin B, Louis T. Bayesian methods for data analysis. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton, Florida 2009.
15. Gelman A, Hill J. Data Analysis using Regression and Multilevel/ Hierarchical Models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
16. Ntzoufras I. Bayesian Modeling Using WinBUGS. John Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey, 2009.
17. Rigel DS, Roy M, Yoo J et al. Impact of guidance from a computer-aided multispectral digital skin lesion analysis device on decision to biopsy lesions clinically suggestive of melanoma. Arch Dermatol 2012; 148(4): 541-3.
18. Vestergaard ME, Macaskill P, Holt PE, Menzies SW. Dermoscopy compared with naked eye examination for the diagnosis of primary melanoma: a meta-analysis of studies performed in a clinical setting. Br J Dermatol 2008; 159(3): 669-76.
19. Beam CA, Layde PM, Sullivan DC. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Findings from a national sample. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156(2): 209-13.
20. Johnson CD, Toledano AY, Herman BA et al. Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting. Gastroenterology 2003; 125(3): 688-95.
21. Chen SC, Pennie ML, Kolm P et al. Diagnosing and managing cutaneous pigmented lesions: primary care physicians versus dermatologists. J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21(7): 678-82.