Teledermatology: a review
Abstract
Teledermatology holds great potential for revolutionizing the delivery of dermatology services, providing equitable service to remote areas and allowing primary care physicians to refer patients to dermatology centres of excellence at a distance. However, before its routine application as a service tool, its reliability, accuracy and cost-effectiveness need to be verified by rigorous evaluation. Teledermatology can be applied in one of two ways: it may be conducted in real-time, utilizing videoconferencing equipment, or by store-and-forward methods, when transmitted digital images or photographs are submitted with a clinical history. While there is a considerable range of reported accuracy and reliability, evidence suggests that teledermatology will become increasingly utilized and incorporated into more conventional dermatology service delivery systems. Studies to date have generally found that real-time dermatology is likely to allow greater clinical information to be obtained from the patient. This may result in fewer patients requiring conventional consultations, but it is generally more time-consuming and costly to the health service provider. It is often favoured by the patient because of the instantaneous nature of the diagnosis and management regimen for the condition, and it has educational value to the primary care physician. Store-and-forward systems of teledermatology often give high levels of diagnostic accuracy, and are cheaper and more convenient for the health…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Reviews of telemedicine have been published indicating promise but with little evidence.
“Reviews have also been published, indicating promise, but with little evidence.”
From Telemedicine in dermatology: a randomised controlled trial (2006) · cites this paper as [19]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 77 · Cited by 224
- Authors
- Eedy, D. J., & Wootton, R.
- Affiliations
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Eedy, D.J.
- ORCID
- Wootton, R.
- Venue
- British Journal of Dermatology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-04
- Volume
- 144
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 696-707
- ISSN
- 0007-0963 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2133
- OpenAlex
- W2152588605
- Cited by
- 224
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Dermatology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Digital Imaging in Medicine
- Keywords
- teledermatology, store-and-forward telemedicine, diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness, primary care referral, digital image transmission
- MeSH terms
- Consumer Behavior, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Skin Diseases, Remote Consultation
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