Cited by 129Dermatological diseases and infestationsDermatology and Skin DiseasesNail Diseases and Treatments

Scabies: advances in noninvasive diagnosis.

Open access
Micali, Giuseppe, Lacarrubba, Francesco, Verzì, Anna Elisa, Chosidow, Olivier, Schwartz, Robert A.·2016·PLoS neglected tropical diseases

Abstract

Scabies is a common, highly contagious skin parasitosis caused by Sarcoptes scabiei var. hominis. Early identification and prompt treatment of infested subjects is essential, as missed diagnosis may result in outbreaks, considerable morbidity, and significantly increased economic burden. The standard diagnostic technique consists of mites' identification by microscopic examination of scales obtained by skin scraping. This is a time-consuming and risk-associated procedure that is also not suitable to a busy practice. In recent years, some advanced and noninvasive techniques such as videodermatoscopy, dermatoscopy, reflectance confocal microscopy, and optical coherence tomography have demonstrated improved efficacy in the diagnosis of scabies. Their advantages include rapid, noninvasive mass screening and post-therapeutic follow-up, with no physical risk. A greater knowledge of these techniques among general practitioners and other specialists involved in the intake care of overcrowded populations vulnerable to scabies infestations is now viewed as urgent and important in the management of outbreaks, as well as in consideration of the recent growing inflow of migrants in Europe from North Africa.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004691

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Noninvasive examination of affected skin by using videodermatoscopy, videomicroscopy, or dermoscopy has high sensitivity and specificity, particularly when performed by experienced operators.

    “Alternatively, noninvasive examination of the affected skin by using videodermatoscopy, videomicroscopy, or dermoscopy can be used, each of which has high sensitivity and specificity, particularly when performed by experienced operators (1404).”

    From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [1404]

    The Videodermatoscopy section describes videodermatoscopy as sensitive and virtually 100% specific at higher magnifications, and reports that low-cost videomicroscopes detected the same diagnostic findings in a small comparison. The Dermoscopy section reports sensitivity of 83%–91% but specificity of 86% in one study and only 46% in another. It also says operator experience affects specificity, not sensitivity, so the claim that each method has high sensitivity and specificity overstates the evidence. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [56]Papini M, Maccheroni R, Bruni PL. O tempora o mores: the cost of managing institutional outbreaks of scabies. Int J Dermatol 1999; 38: 638– 639. 10487459

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Micali, G., Lacarrubba, F., Verzì, A. E., Chosidow, O., & Schwartz, R. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Catania (IT)
  • Hôpital Tenon (FR)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Corresponding author
Micali, Giuseppe
Venue
PLoS neglected tropical diseases
Published
2016-06-16
Volume
10
Issue
6
Pages
e0004691
ISSN
  • 1935-2727 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-2735
OpenAlex
W2443130410
Cited by
129
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 7
FWCI
1.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS neglected tropical diseases (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Dermatological diseases and infestations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatology and Skin Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Nail Diseases and Treatments
Keywords
scabies, Sarcoptes scabiei var. hominis, non-invasive diagnosis, videodermatoscopy, dermoscopy, reflectance confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography, skin scraping, mass screening, epidemic control, migrants, Maghrebi immigrants
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Sarcoptes scabiei, Scabies, Microscopy, Confocal, Tomography, Optical Coherence, Dermoscopy

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