Cited by 61Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementDigital Imaging in Medicine

A Comparison of Teledermatology using Store-and-Forward Methodology Alone, and in Combination with Web Camera Videoconferencing

Baba, Mete, Seçkin, Deniz, Kapdağli, Serhan·2005·Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare

Abstract

We compared the diagnostic accuracy of conventional asynchronous teledermatology (‘store-and-forward’ [SAF]) with a combined technique, in which SAF methodology was used first, followed by a videoconference using low-cost Web cameras. The study involved 228 patients with 242 lesions. For each case, two independent teledermatologists (A and B) evaluated digital images and clinical information by the conventional SAF method and gave a single diagnosis. Then, each communicated with the patient via Web cameras and gave a single diagnosis (combined method). Finally, teledermatologist A performed a face-to-face examination of each patient and established the gold standard diagnosis. With the conventional SAF method, the diagnostic accuracy of teledermatologist A was 81%, while that for teledermatologist B was 75%. With the combined method, the corresponding values were 90% and 82% ( P<0.001 for both). There was no significant difference in the interobserver agreement between the two methods. Use of Web camera videoconferencing improved patient satisfaction with teledermatology. This method of teledermatology may be a useful alternative to the SAF method alone.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1357633x0501100706

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baba, M., Seçkin, D., & Kapdağli, S.
Affiliations
  • Başkent University (TR)
  • Başkent University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Dermatology, Adana Hospital, Adana, Turkey
Corresponding author
Baba, Mete
Venue
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
Published
2005-10
Volume
11
Issue
7
Pages
354-360
ISSN
  • 1357-633X (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-1109
OpenAlex
W2082057195
Cited by
61
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4
FWCI
3.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Digital Imaging in Medicine
Keywords
teledermatology, store-and-forward telemedicine, diagnostic accuracy, skin lesions, interobserver agreement, patient satisfaction, asynchronous telemedicine
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Child, Preschool, Dermatology, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Skin Diseases, Turkey, Reproducibility of Results, Patient Satisfaction, Remote Consultation, Internet, Videoconferencing

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