Cited by 36Nail Diseases and TreatmentsMedicine and Dermatology Studies HistoryCancer and Skin Lesions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

PAS and GMS utility in dermatopathology: Review of the current medical literature

Open access
Shalin, Sara C., Ferringer, Tammie, Cassarino, David S.·2020·Journal of Cutaneous Pathology

Abstract

The American Society of Dermatopathology has established an Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) Committee with the intention of establishing evidence-based recommendations regarding the appropriateness of various ancillary tests commonly utilized by dermatopathologists. Periodic acid Schiff (PAS) and Grocott (or Gomori) methenamine silver (GMS) stains represent some of the most commonly employed ancillary tests in dermatopathology. The utility of these tests was targeted for evaluation by the AUC. This literature review represents a comprehensive evaluation of available evidence for the utility of PAS and/or GMS staining of skin and nail biopsies. In concert with expert opinion, these data will be incorporated into future recommendations by the AUC for PAS and GMS staining in routine dermatopathology practice.

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 · 10.1111/cup.13769

Cites

53 of 53 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

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Della Speranza VFR, 2005, A common mistake when staining for fungi, HistoLogic, 38, 1
  2. Mehregan DA, 1997, Onychomycosis, Cutis, 59, 247

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 36

Metadata

Authors
Shalin, S. C., Ferringer, T., & Cassarino, D. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (US)
  • Geisinger Medical Center (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente (US)
Corresponding author
Cassarino, David S.
Venue
Journal of Cutaneous Pathology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-08-22
Volume
47
Issue
11
Pages
1096-1102
ISSN
  • 0303-6987 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0560
OpenAlex
W3033941366
Cited by
36
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3
FWCI
0.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cutaneous Pathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Nail Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Medicine and Dermatology Studies History
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Cancer and Skin Lesions
Keywords
PAS staining, Gomori methenamine silver staining, appropriate use criteria, ancillary testing, dermatopathology, nail biopsy, skin biopsy, evidence-based recommendations
MeSH terms
Dermatology, Humans, Methenamine, Pathology, Periodic Acid-Schiff Reaction, Skin Diseases, Staining and Labeling

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