Three-Point Checklist Dermoscopy for Melanoma Screening: Experience in Medical Students New to Dermatology.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Aldo Ibani, Diego Aragón-Caqueo, Monserrat Naveiro, Felipe Sánchez, Daniela Ríos, Javiera Medina, Antonio Guglielmetti
{"title":"Three-Point Checklist Dermoscopy for Melanoma Screening: Experience in Medical Students New to Dermatology.","authors":"Aldo Ibani, Diego Aragón-Caqueo, Monserrat Naveiro, Felipe Sánchez, Daniela Ríos, Javiera Medina, Antonio Guglielmetti","doi":"10.5826/dpc.1403a211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Early detection of melanoma and optimal referral to the specialist starts in primary care. Medical education is usually deficient in training general physicians in early detection and risk management for most skin malignancies. A three-point dermoscopy checklist is used as a screening tool for differentiating malignant and benign pigmented lesions in non-expert clinicians using dermoscopy.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the impact of brief medical training on the three-point dermoscopy algorithm in third-year medical students new to dermatology and to determine the levels of sensitivity and specificity to differentiate malignant and benign pigmented lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Optional dermoscopy lecture for third-year medical students new to dermatology in the context of general medical semiology courses, with case discussion and evaluation of 50 dermoscopy cases (25 benign and 25 malignant). Students were asked to classify malignant versus benign pathology based on the three-point dermoscopy algorithm discussed. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated according to the students' responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-five students provided 3250 responses. Malignant pathology was misclassified as benign in 154 responses, while benign pathology was misclassified as malignant in 668 responses. Sensitivity and specificity for differentiating malignant lesions were 89.70% and 61.99%, respectively. Moderate interobserver agreement was found (Kappa value = 0.50; [CI: 0.47-0.54]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When evaluating melanocytic lesions, the focus of primary healthcare and general medical education should emphasize the correct determination of malignant or benign pathology. Teaching the three-point dermoscopy rule to medical students new to dermatology yields satisfactory levels of sensitivity and specificity, comparable to general physicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":11168,"journal":{"name":"Dermatology practical & conceptual","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11314029/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dermatology practical & conceptual","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5826/dpc.1403a211","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Early detection of melanoma and optimal referral to the specialist starts in primary care. Medical education is usually deficient in training general physicians in early detection and risk management for most skin malignancies. A three-point dermoscopy checklist is used as a screening tool for differentiating malignant and benign pigmented lesions in non-expert clinicians using dermoscopy.

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of brief medical training on the three-point dermoscopy algorithm in third-year medical students new to dermatology and to determine the levels of sensitivity and specificity to differentiate malignant and benign pigmented lesions.

Methods: Optional dermoscopy lecture for third-year medical students new to dermatology in the context of general medical semiology courses, with case discussion and evaluation of 50 dermoscopy cases (25 benign and 25 malignant). Students were asked to classify malignant versus benign pathology based on the three-point dermoscopy algorithm discussed. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated according to the students' responses.

Results: Sixty-five students provided 3250 responses. Malignant pathology was misclassified as benign in 154 responses, while benign pathology was misclassified as malignant in 668 responses. Sensitivity and specificity for differentiating malignant lesions were 89.70% and 61.99%, respectively. Moderate interobserver agreement was found (Kappa value = 0.50; [CI: 0.47-0.54]).

Conclusion: When evaluating melanocytic lesions, the focus of primary healthcare and general medical education should emphasize the correct determination of malignant or benign pathology. Teaching the three-point dermoscopy rule to medical students new to dermatology yields satisfactory levels of sensitivity and specificity, comparable to general physicians.

用于黑色素瘤筛查的三点式皮肤镜检查:初学皮肤科的医学生的经验。
介绍:黑色素瘤的早期发现和向专科医生的最佳转诊始于初级保健。医学教育通常缺乏对普通医生进行早期检测和大多数皮肤恶性肿瘤风险管理方面的培训。在使用皮肤镜检查的非专业临床医生中,三点皮肤镜检查清单被用作区分恶性和良性色素性病变的筛查工具:评估简短医学培训对刚接触皮肤病学的三年级医学生使用三点皮肤镜检查算法的影响,并确定区分恶性和良性色素性病变的敏感性和特异性水平:方法:在普通医学符号学课程中为刚接触皮肤病学的三年级医学生开设皮肤镜检查选修课,并对50个皮肤镜检查病例(25个良性病例和25个恶性病例)进行病例讨论和评估。要求学生根据讨论的三点皮肤镜算法对恶性和良性病理进行分类。根据学生的回答计算灵敏度、特异性和预测值:结果:65 名学生提供了 3250 个回答。恶性病变被误诊为良性的有 154 个,良性病变被误诊为恶性的有 668 个。区分恶性病变的敏感性和特异性分别为 89.70% 和 61.99%。观察者之间的一致性适中(Kappa值=0.50;[CI:0.47-0.54]):结论:在评估黑色素细胞病变时,初级医疗保健和全科医学教育的重点应放在正确判断恶性或良性病变上。向刚接触皮肤病学的医学生传授三点皮肤镜检查规则可获得令人满意的灵敏度和特异性水平,与普通医生相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
217
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信