The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Interobserver variability on the histopathologic diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma and other pigmented skin lesions.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the interobserver agreement on the diagnosis and classification of cutaneous melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A set of 140 slides of cutaneous melanoma, including a small subset of benign pigmented skin lesions, were circulated to four experienced histopathologists. The kappa statistic for multiple ratings per subject was calculated using the method described by Fleiss. RESULTS: The kappa value on the diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma versus benign lesions was 0.61. There was some discordance on the diagnosis in 37 of 140 cases (26%). For the histopathologic classification of cutaneous melanoma, the highest kappa values were attained for Breslow thickness (kappa = 0.76) and presence of ulceration (kappa = 0.87). The agreement was generally poor for other histologic features, such as level of dermal invasion (kappa = 0.38), presence of regression (kappa = 0.27), and lymphocytic infiltration (kappa = 0.27). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests considerable disagreement among pathologists on the diagnosis of melanoma versus other pigmented lesions. Tumor thickness and presence of ulceration are the most reproducible histologic features of cutaneous melanoma.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters.
Fleiss, J. L. (1971) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0031619 · Cited by 8,733
Cited by
Final Version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System for Cutaneous Melanoma
Balch, C. M., Buzaid, A. C., Soong, S.-J., Atkins, M. B., Cascinelli, N., Coit, D. G., Fleming, I. D., Gershenwald, J. E., Houghton, A., Kirkwood, J. M., et al. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2001.19.16.3635 · Cited by 2,636
Balch, C. M., Soong, S.-J., Gershenwald, J. E., Thompson, J. F., Reintgen, D. S., Cascinelli, N., Urist, M., McMasters, K. M., Ross, M. I., Kirkwood, J. M., et al. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2001.19.16.3622 · Cited by 2,388
Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions: Results of a consensus meeting via the Internet
Argenziano, G., Soyer, H. P., Chimenti, S., Talamini, R., Corona, R., Sera, F., Binder, M., Cerroni, L., De Rosa, G., Ferrara, G., et al. (2003) · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · doi:10.1067/mjd.2003.281 · Cited by 1,208
Self-citationStern, R. S., Nichols, K. T., & Väkevä, L. H. (1997) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199704103361501 · Cited by 656
Hekler, A., Utikal, J. S., Enk, A. H., Solass, W., Schmitt, M., Klode, J., Schadendorf, D., Sondermann, W., Franklin, C., Bestvater, F., et al. (2019) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2019.06.012 · Cited by 285
Metadata
- Authors
- Corona, R., Mele, A., Amini, M., De Rosa, G., Coppola, G., Piccardi, P., Fucci, M., Pasquini, P., & Faraggiana, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 1996-04
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1218-1223
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W1943557071
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 1.75
- 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: Interobserver variability on the histopathologic diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma and other pigmented skin lesions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1996.14.4.1218
- The paper
- Corona, R., Mele, A., Amini, M., De Rosa, G., Coppola, G., Piccardi, P., Fucci, M., Pasquini, P., & Faraggiana, T. (1996). Interobserver variability on the histopathologic diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma and other pigmented skin lesions. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1996.14.4.1218
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.