量化光化性角化病皮肤光损伤的医师之间和医师内部差异。

Journal of clinical and investigative dermatology Pub Date : 2020-09-01 Epub Date: 2020-09-06
Benjamin Schmeusser, Christina Borchers, Jeffrey B Travers, Samia Borchers, Julian Trevino, Max Rubin, Heidi Donnelly, Karl Kellawan, Lydia Carpenter, Shalini Bahl, Craig Rohan, Elizabeth Muennich, Scott Guenthner, Holly Hahn, Ali Rkein, Marc Darst, Nico Mousdicas, Elizabeth Cates, Ulas Sunar, Trevor Bihl
{"title":"量化光化性角化病皮肤光损伤的医师之间和医师内部差异。","authors":"Benjamin Schmeusser,&nbsp;Christina Borchers,&nbsp;Jeffrey B Travers,&nbsp;Samia Borchers,&nbsp;Julian Trevino,&nbsp;Max Rubin,&nbsp;Heidi Donnelly,&nbsp;Karl Kellawan,&nbsp;Lydia Carpenter,&nbsp;Shalini Bahl,&nbsp;Craig Rohan,&nbsp;Elizabeth Muennich,&nbsp;Scott Guenthner,&nbsp;Holly Hahn,&nbsp;Ali Rkein,&nbsp;Marc Darst,&nbsp;Nico Mousdicas,&nbsp;Elizabeth Cates,&nbsp;Ulas Sunar,&nbsp;Trevor Bihl","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We investigated the variations in physician evaluation of skin photodamage based on a published photodamage scale. Of interest is the utility of a 10-level scale ranging from none and mild photodamage to actinic keratosis (AK). The dorsal forearms of 55 adult subjects with various amounts of photodamage were considered. Each forearm was independently evaluated by 15 board-certified dermatologists according to the Global Assessment Severity Scale ranging from 0 (less severe) to 9 (the most progressed stage of skin damage). Dermatologists rated the levels of photodamage based upon the photographs in blinded fashion. Results show substantial disagreement amongst the dermatologists on the severity of photodamage. Our results indicate that ratings could be more consistent if using a scale of less levels (5-levels or 3-levels). Ultimately, clinicians can use this knowledge to provide better interpretation of inter-rater evaluations and provide more reliable assessment and frequent monitoring of high-risk populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":73660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical and investigative dermatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7575200/pdf/nihms-1627493.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inter- and Intra-physician variation in quantifying actinic keratosis skin photodamage.\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Schmeusser,&nbsp;Christina Borchers,&nbsp;Jeffrey B Travers,&nbsp;Samia Borchers,&nbsp;Julian Trevino,&nbsp;Max Rubin,&nbsp;Heidi Donnelly,&nbsp;Karl Kellawan,&nbsp;Lydia Carpenter,&nbsp;Shalini Bahl,&nbsp;Craig Rohan,&nbsp;Elizabeth Muennich,&nbsp;Scott Guenthner,&nbsp;Holly Hahn,&nbsp;Ali Rkein,&nbsp;Marc Darst,&nbsp;Nico Mousdicas,&nbsp;Elizabeth Cates,&nbsp;Ulas Sunar,&nbsp;Trevor Bihl\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We investigated the variations in physician evaluation of skin photodamage based on a published photodamage scale. Of interest is the utility of a 10-level scale ranging from none and mild photodamage to actinic keratosis (AK). The dorsal forearms of 55 adult subjects with various amounts of photodamage were considered. Each forearm was independently evaluated by 15 board-certified dermatologists according to the Global Assessment Severity Scale ranging from 0 (less severe) to 9 (the most progressed stage of skin damage). Dermatologists rated the levels of photodamage based upon the photographs in blinded fashion. Results show substantial disagreement amongst the dermatologists on the severity of photodamage. Our results indicate that ratings could be more consistent if using a scale of less levels (5-levels or 3-levels). Ultimately, clinicians can use this knowledge to provide better interpretation of inter-rater evaluations and provide more reliable assessment and frequent monitoring of high-risk populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical and investigative dermatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7575200/pdf/nihms-1627493.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical and investigative dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/9/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical and investigative dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/9/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们根据公布的光损伤量表调查了医生评估皮肤光损伤的差异。我们感兴趣的是从无和轻度光损伤到光化性角化病(AK)的10级量表的效用。研究了55例不同程度光损伤的成人前臂背侧。每个前臂由15名委员会认证的皮肤科医生根据全球评估严重程度量表进行独立评估,范围从0(较轻)到9(最严重的皮肤损伤阶段)。皮肤科医生以盲法根据照片对光损伤程度进行评级。结果显示,皮肤科医生对光损伤的严重程度存在实质性分歧。我们的结果表明,如果使用较少级别的量表(5级或3级),评分可能更加一致。最终,临床医生可以利用这些知识来更好地解释评分者之间的评估,并提供更可靠的评估和对高危人群的频繁监测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inter- and Intra-physician variation in quantifying actinic keratosis skin photodamage.

We investigated the variations in physician evaluation of skin photodamage based on a published photodamage scale. Of interest is the utility of a 10-level scale ranging from none and mild photodamage to actinic keratosis (AK). The dorsal forearms of 55 adult subjects with various amounts of photodamage were considered. Each forearm was independently evaluated by 15 board-certified dermatologists according to the Global Assessment Severity Scale ranging from 0 (less severe) to 9 (the most progressed stage of skin damage). Dermatologists rated the levels of photodamage based upon the photographs in blinded fashion. Results show substantial disagreement amongst the dermatologists on the severity of photodamage. Our results indicate that ratings could be more consistent if using a scale of less levels (5-levels or 3-levels). Ultimately, clinicians can use this knowledge to provide better interpretation of inter-rater evaluations and provide more reliable assessment and frequent monitoring of high-risk populations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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