Mobile teledermatology is a valid method to estimate prevalence of melanocytic naevi in children

Acta Dermato-Venereologica

Volumn 95, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 303-306

  Karlsson, Maria A ^a   Lindelöf, Bernt ^a   Wahlgren, Carl Fredrik ^a   Wiklund, Kerstin ^b   Rodvall, Ylva ^b  

^a KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Children; Mobile teledermatology; Naevi; Public health

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; BACK; CHILD; CHILDHOOD DISEASE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; DERMATOLOGIST; DIGITAL IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MELANOCYTIC NEVUS; MOBILE APPLICATION; MOBILE PHONE; MOBILE TELEDERMATOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SKIN EXAMINATION; TELEDERMATOLOGY; ADVERSE EFFECTS; AGE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DERMATOLOGY; DEVICES; EVALUATION STUDY; NEVUS, PIGMENTED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PREVALENCE; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; RISK FACTOR; SKIN NEOPLASMS; SUNLIGHT; SWEDEN; TELEPATHOLOGY; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; CELL PHONES; CHILD; DERMATOLOGY; HUMANS; MOBILE APPLICATIONS; NEVUS, PIGMENTED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREVALENCE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK FACTORS; SKIN NEOPLASMS; SUNLIGHT; SWEDEN; TELEPATHOLOGY;

EID: 84922812085     PISSN: 00015555     EISSN: 16512057     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2340/00015555-1950     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Erdmann F, Lortet-Tieulent J, Schuz J, Zeeb H, Greinert R, Breitbart EW, et al. International trends in the incidence of malignant melanoma 1953–2008 – are recent generations at higher or lower risk? Int J Cancer 2013; 132: 385–400.
2. Gandini S, Autier P, Boniol M. Reviews on sun exposure and artificial light and melanoma. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 2011; 107: 362–366.
3. Iannacone MR, Youlden DR, Baade PD, Aitken JF, Green AC., Melanoma incidence trends and survival in adolescents and young adults in Queensland, Australia. Int J Cancer 2014 May 8. [Epub ahead of print].
4. Pfahlberg A, Uter W, Kraus C, Wienecke WR, Reulbach U, Kolmel KF, et al. Monitoring of nevus density in children as a method to detect shifts in melanoma risk in the population. Prev Med 2004; 38: 382–387.
5. Karlsson MA, Wahlgren CF, Wiklund K, Rodvall Y. Parental sun-protective regimens and prevalence of common melanocytic naevi among 7-year-old children in Sweden: changes over a 5-year period. Br J Dermatol 2011; 164: 830–837.
6. Smith A, Harrison S, Nowak M, Buettner P, Maclennan R. Changes in the pattern of sun exposure and sun protec- tion in young children from tropical Australia. J Am Acad Dermatol 2013; 68: 774–783.
7. Wootton R, Bahaadinbeigy K, Hailey D. Estimating travel reduction associated with the use of telemedicine by patients and healthcare professionals: proposal for quantitative synthesis in a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 2011; 11: 185.
8. Hsueh MT, Eastman K, McFarland LV, Raugi GJ, Reiber GE. Teledermatology patient satisfaction in the Pacific Northwest. Telemed J E Health 2012; 18: 377–381.
9. Kroemer S, Fruhauf J, Campbell TM, Massone C, Schwantzer G, Soyer HP, et al. Mobile teledermatology for skin tumour screening: diagnostic accuracy of clinical and dermoscopic image tele-evaluation using cellular phones. Br J Dermatol 2011; 164: 973–979.
10. Boyce Z, Gilmore S, Xu C, Soyer HP. The remote assessment of melanocytic skin lesions: a viable alternative to face- to-face consultation. Dermatology 2011; 223: 244–250.
11. Lamel SA, Haldeman KM, Ely H, Kovarik CL, Pak H, Armstrong AW. Application of mobile teledermatology for skin cancer screening. J Am Acad Dermatol 2012; 67: 576–581.
12. Wolf JA, Moreau JF, Akilov O, Patton T, English JC, III, Ho J, et al. Diagnostic inaccuracy of smartphone applications for melanoma detection. JAMA Dermatol 2013; 149: 422–426.
13. Robson Y, Blackford S, Roberts D. Caution in melanoma risk analysis with smartphone application technology. Br J Dermatol 2012; 167: 703–704.
14. Chen TS, Goldyne ME, Mathes EF, Frieden IJ, Gilliam AE. Pediatric teledermatology: observations based on 429 consults. J Am Acad Dermatol 2010; 62: 61–66.
15. Heffner VA, Lyon VB, Brousseau DC, Holland KE, Yen K. Store-and-forward teledermatology versus in-person visits: a comparison in pediatric teledermatology clinic. J Am Acad Dermatol 2009; 60: 956–961.
16. Fitzpatrick TB. The validity and practicality of sun-reactive skin types I through VI. Arch Dermatol 1988; 124: 869–871.
17. English DR MacLennan R, Rivers J, Kelly J, Armstrong BK. Epidemiological studies of melanocytic naevi: protocol for identifying and recording naevi. IARC International report, Lyon France 1990; 90/002.
18. Dermicus [Internet]. Available from: http://apegroup.com/project/dermicus.
19. Carmona AB [Internet]. Available from: http://www.carmona.se/ovriga-tjanster/.
20. Synnerstad I, Nilsson L, Fredrikson M, Rosdahl I. Frequency and distribution pattern of melanocytic naevi in Swedish 8-9-year-old children. Acta Derm Venereol 2004; 84: 271–276.
21. Gallus S, Naldi L, Carli P, La Vecchia C, Italian Group for Epidemiologic Research in D. Nevus count on specific anatomic sites as a predictor of total body count: a survey of 3,406 children from Italy. Am J Epidemiol 2007; 166: 472–478.
22. Dodd AT, Morelli J, Mokrohisky ST, Asdigian N, Byers TE, Crane LA. Melanocytic nevi and sun exposure in a cohort of colorado children: anatomic distribution and site-specific sunburn. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention 2007; 16: 2136–2143.
23. English DR, Armstrong BK. Melanocytic nevi in children. II. Observer variation in counting nevi. Am J Epidemiol 1994; 139: 402–407.
24. Aitken JF, Green A, Eldridge A, Green L, Pfitzner J, Battistutta D, et al. Comparability of naevus counts between and within examiners, and comparison with computer image analysis. Br J Cancer 1994; 69: 487–491.