恶性黑色素瘤的过度诊断:范围界定综述。

IF 9 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Mille Falk Bjørch, Emma Grundtvig Gram, John Brandt Brodersen
{"title":"恶性黑色素瘤的过度诊断:范围界定综述。","authors":"Mille Falk Bjørch, Emma Grundtvig Gram, John Brandt Brodersen","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We aimed to systematically identify and scrutinise published empirical evidence about overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma and examine how frequent overdiagnosis of melanoma is and whether this is related to different types of interventions or diagnostic technologies.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Empirical studies that discussed overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma were eligible, including qualitative and quantitative studies in any type of population, age group and geographical location. We excluded studies that did not include empirical data, studies that only mentioned 'overdiagnosis' without addressing it further and studies that used the term overdiagnosis for cases of misdiagnosis or false positives.We developed the search strategy in cooperation with an information specialist. We searched five databases on 21 April 2022: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library.This scoping review adheres to The JBI methodology and Prefered Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts for inclusion and extracted data from the included studies. The data extracted include study characteristics, population details, research question, the context and the study's main results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our search resulted in 1134 potentially relevant studies. 35 studies were included: 29 register studies, 3 cohort studies, 1 case-control study, 1 survey study and 1 randomised controlled trial. Most register studies examined trends in melanoma incidence and/or mortality and found a significant increase in incidence between 0.39% and 6.6% annually and a little or no increase in mortality. Three cohort studies and one case-control study showed that skin screening was associated with increased detection of melanoma; especially in situ or thin invasive melanoma. Three studies estimated the degree of overdiagnosis which ranged from 29% to 60%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Epidemiological data suggest a high degree of overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma. Studies that examined the association between skin screening and malignant melanoma all found increased detection of melanomas, mostly thin and in situ melanomas, which raises concern about overdiagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"17-28"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma: a scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Mille Falk Bjørch, Emma Grundtvig Gram, John Brandt Brodersen\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112341\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We aimed to systematically identify and scrutinise published empirical evidence about overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma and examine how frequent overdiagnosis of melanoma is and whether this is related to different types of interventions or diagnostic technologies.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Empirical studies that discussed overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma were eligible, including qualitative and quantitative studies in any type of population, age group and geographical location. We excluded studies that did not include empirical data, studies that only mentioned 'overdiagnosis' without addressing it further and studies that used the term overdiagnosis for cases of misdiagnosis or false positives.We developed the search strategy in cooperation with an information specialist. We searched five databases on 21 April 2022: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library.This scoping review adheres to The JBI methodology and Prefered Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts for inclusion and extracted data from the included studies. The data extracted include study characteristics, population details, research question, the context and the study's main results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our search resulted in 1134 potentially relevant studies. 35 studies were included: 29 register studies, 3 cohort studies, 1 case-control study, 1 survey study and 1 randomised controlled trial. Most register studies examined trends in melanoma incidence and/or mortality and found a significant increase in incidence between 0.39% and 6.6% annually and a little or no increase in mortality. Three cohort studies and one case-control study showed that skin screening was associated with increased detection of melanoma; especially in situ or thin invasive melanoma. Three studies estimated the degree of overdiagnosis which ranged from 29% to 60%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Epidemiological data suggest a high degree of overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma. Studies that examined the association between skin screening and malignant melanoma all found increased detection of melanomas, mostly thin and in situ melanomas, which raises concern about overdiagnosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9059,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17-28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112341\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112341","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们旨在系统地识别和仔细审查已发表的恶性黑色素瘤过度诊断的经验证据,并检查黑色素瘤的过度诊断频率,以及这是否与不同类型的干预或诊断技术有关。设计和设置:讨论恶性黑色素瘤过度诊断的实证研究是合格的,包括在任何类型的人群、年龄组和地理位置进行的定性和定量研究。我们排除了不包括经验数据的研究,只提到“过度诊断”而没有进一步解决的研究,以及使用过度诊断一词来描述误诊或假阳性病例的研究。我们与一位信息专家合作制定了搜索策略。我们在2022年4月21日搜索了五个数据库:MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、PsycINFO和Cochrane Library。本范围界定审查遵循JBI方法和系统评价首选报告项目以及范围界定审查的Meta分析扩展(PRISMA ScR)。两名评审员独立筛选了纳入的标题、摘要和全文,并从纳入的研究中提取了数据。提取的数据包括研究特征、人群细节、研究问题、背景和研究的主要结果。结果:我们的搜索结果为1134项潜在的相关研究。35项研究包括:29项注册研究、3项队列研究、1项病例对照研究、1例调查研究和1项随机对照试验。大多数登记研究调查了黑色素瘤发病率和/或死亡率的趋势,发现发病率每年显著增加0.39%至6.6%,死亡率略有增加或没有增加。三项队列研究和一项病例对照研究表明,皮肤筛查与黑色素瘤检测增加有关;尤其是原位或薄侵袭性黑色素瘤。三项研究估计了过度诊断的程度,其范围从29%到60%。结论:流行病学数据表明恶性黑色素瘤的过度诊断程度很高。研究皮肤筛查与恶性黑色素瘤之间的关系的研究都发现,黑色素瘤的检测增加,主要是薄的原位黑色素瘤,这引发了人们对过度诊断的担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma: a scoping review.

Objectives: We aimed to systematically identify and scrutinise published empirical evidence about overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma and examine how frequent overdiagnosis of melanoma is and whether this is related to different types of interventions or diagnostic technologies.

Design and setting: Empirical studies that discussed overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma were eligible, including qualitative and quantitative studies in any type of population, age group and geographical location. We excluded studies that did not include empirical data, studies that only mentioned 'overdiagnosis' without addressing it further and studies that used the term overdiagnosis for cases of misdiagnosis or false positives.We developed the search strategy in cooperation with an information specialist. We searched five databases on 21 April 2022: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library.This scoping review adheres to The JBI methodology and Prefered Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts for inclusion and extracted data from the included studies. The data extracted include study characteristics, population details, research question, the context and the study's main results.

Results: Our search resulted in 1134 potentially relevant studies. 35 studies were included: 29 register studies, 3 cohort studies, 1 case-control study, 1 survey study and 1 randomised controlled trial. Most register studies examined trends in melanoma incidence and/or mortality and found a significant increase in incidence between 0.39% and 6.6% annually and a little or no increase in mortality. Three cohort studies and one case-control study showed that skin screening was associated with increased detection of melanoma; especially in situ or thin invasive melanoma. Three studies estimated the degree of overdiagnosis which ranged from 29% to 60%.

Conclusions: Epidemiological data suggest a high degree of overdiagnosis in malignant melanoma. Studies that examined the association between skin screening and malignant melanoma all found increased detection of melanomas, mostly thin and in situ melanomas, which raises concern about overdiagnosis.

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
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine (BMJ EBM) publishes original evidence-based research, insights and opinions on what matters for health care. We focus on the tools, methods, and concepts that are basic and central to practising evidence-based medicine and deliver relevant, trustworthy and impactful evidence. BMJ EBM is a Plan S compliant Transformative Journal and adheres to the highest possible industry standards for editorial policies and publication ethics.
×
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