Cited by 32Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

The Influence of Dermatologist and Primary Care Physician Visits on Melanoma Outcomes Among Medicare Beneficiaries

Open access
Roetzheim, R. G., Lee, J.-H., Ferrante, J. M., Gonzalez, E. C., Chen, R., Fisher, K. J., Love-Jackson, K., McCarthy, E. P.·2013·The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory visits to dermatologists and primary care physicians (PCPs) may improve melanoma outcomes through early detection. We sought to measure the effect of dermatologist and PCP visits on melanoma stage at diagnosis and mortality. METHODS: We used data from the database linking Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) and Medicare data (1994 to 2005) to examine patterns of dermatologist and PCP ambulatory visits before diagnosis for 18,884 Medicare beneficiaries with invasive melanoma or unknown stage at diagnosis. Visits were assessed during the 2-year time interval before the month of diagnosis. We examined whether dermatologist and PCP visits were associated with diagnosis of thinner melanomas (defined as local stage tumors having Breslow thickness <1 mm) and lower melanoma mortality. RESULTS: Medicare beneficiaries visiting both a dermatologist and PCP before diagnosis had greater odds of diagnosis of a thin melanoma (adjusted odds ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.41) and lower melanoma mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.76) compared with those without such visits. The mortality findings were attenuated once stage at diagnosis was adjusted for in the multivariable model. CONCLUSION: Improved melanoma outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries may depend on adequate access and use of dermatologist and PCP services.

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 · 10.3122/jabfm.2013.06.130042

Cites

63 of 63 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roetzheim, R. G., Lee, J.-H., Ferrante, J. M., Gonzalez, E. C., Chen, R., Fisher, K. J., Love-Jackson, K., & McCarthy, E. P.
Affiliations
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
Venue
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Published
2013-11-01
Volume
26
Issue
6
Pages
637-647
ISSN
  • 1557-2625 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-7118
OpenAlex
W2109495601
Cited by
32
References
63
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Rutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • American Cancer Society
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA076292)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
melanoma, dermatologist visits, primary care physician visits, outpatient care, early detection, Breslow thickness, melanoma mortality, Medicare beneficiaries, health care access, cancer screening
MeSH terms
Melanoma, Cutaneous Malignant, Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Dermatology, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Medicare, Humans, Male, Melanoma, Office Visits, Primary Health Care, Retrospective Studies, Skin Neoplasms, United States, Survival Rate, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, SEER Program, Physicians, Primary Care

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