Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 167

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy for basal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Reiter, Ofer, Mimouni, Ilit, Gdalevich, Michael, Marghoob, Ashfaq A., Levi, Assi, Hodak, Emmilia, Leshem, Yael Anne·2019·Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

Abstract

Background: Dermoscopy is a noninvasive technique for the diagnosis of skin lesions. Its accuracy for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) has not been systematically studied. Objective: We sought to systematically investigate the accuracy of dermoscopy for the diagnosis of BCC compared with examination with the naked eye. Methods: A systematic review of studies reporting the accuracy of naked eye examination and dermoscopy for the diagnosis of BCC was conducted. A meta‐analysis for sensitivity and specificity was performed using a bivariate mixed‐effects logistic regression modeling framework. Results: Seventeen studies were identified. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of dermoscopy for the diagnosis of BCC were 91.2% and 95%, respectively. In studies comparing test performance, adding dermoscopy to naked eye examination improved sensitivity from 66.9% to 85% (P = .0001) and specificity from 97.2% to 98.2% (P = .006). The sensitivity and specificity of dermoscopy were higher for pigmented than nonpigmented BCC. Sensitivity increased when dermoscopy was performed by experts and when the diagnosis was based on in‐person dermoscopy as opposed to dermoscopic photographs. Limitations: Significant heterogeneity among studies with a medium‐to‐high risk of bias. Conclusion: Dermoscopy is a sensitive and specific add‐on tool for the diagnosis of BCC. It is especially valuable for pigmented BCC.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jaad.2018.12.026

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 167

Metadata

Authors
Reiter, O., Mimouni, I., Gdalevich, M., Marghoob, A. A., Levi, A., Hodak, E., & Leshem, Y. A.
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-05
Volume
80
Issue
5
Pages
1380-1388
ISSN
0190-9622 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2906079923
Cited by
167
References
2
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy for basal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jaad.2018.12.026
The paper
Reiter, O., Mimouni, I., Gdalevich, M., Marghoob, A. A., Levi, A., Hodak, E., & Leshem, Y. A. (2019). The diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy for basal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2018.12.026

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.