Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 311

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

In Vivo Confocal Microscopy for Diagnosis of Melanoma and Basal Cell Carcinoma Using a Two-Step Method: Analysis of 710 Consecutive Clinically Equivocal Cases

Open access
Guitera, Pascale, Menzies, Scott W., Longo, Caterina, Cesinaro, Anna M., Scolyer, Richard A., Pellacani, Giovanni·2012·Journal of Investigative Dermatology

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 · 10.1038/jid.2012.172

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 311

Metadata

Authors
Guitera, P., Menzies, S. W., Longo, C., Cesinaro, A. M., Scolyer, R. A., & Pellacani, G.
Venue
Journal of Investigative Dermatology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-10
Volume
132
Issue
10
Pages
2386-2394
ISSN
0022-202X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2088960045
Cited by
311
References
0
FWCI
13.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: In Vivo Confocal Microscopy for Diagnosis of Melanoma and Basal Cell Carcinoma Using a Two-Step Method: Analysis of 710 Consecutive Clinically Equivocal Cases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/jid.2012.172
The paper
Guitera, P., Menzies, S. W., Longo, C., Cesinaro, A. M., Scolyer, R. A., & Pellacani, G. (2012). In Vivo Confocal Microscopy for Diagnosis of Melanoma and Basal Cell Carcinoma Using a Two-Step Method: Analysis of 710 Consecutive Clinically Equivocal Cases. Journal of Investigative Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2012.172

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.