The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of dermatoscopy in detecting malignant melanoma
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence that dermatoscopy improves the accuracy of diagnosis of melanomas in clinical practice. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE 1983-January 1997, EMBASE 1980-1996, and bibliographies of retrieved articles. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Studies selected were original studies with formal methods and results sections comparing diagnostic accuracy of dermatoscopy for malignant melanoma with another clinical method; the criterion standard was excision biopsy with histopathological examination; and accuracy of dermatoscopic diagnosis was determined over a spectrum of stages of melanoma and skin lesions commonly confused with melanoma. Data were extracted by a single observer. DATA SYNTHESIS: 579 articles were identified; six studies met the inclusion criteria. Positive likelihood ratios for dermatoscopy for diagnosis of melanoma ranged from 2.9 to 10.3. Dermatoscopy had 10%-27% higher sensitivity than clinical diagnosis in the two studies with the most clinically equivocal lesions. However, when sensitivity of clinical diagnosis was more than 84%, sensitivity of dermatoscopy was only slightly higher. One study of dermatologists with no training in dermatoscopy showed a significant decrease in sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Variability between studies in methods, observers and types of pigmented skin lesions and lack of studies in primary care make generalisation of results difficult. Dermatoscopy appeared not to improve the accuracy of diagnosis enough to alter the clinical management of most pigmented skin lesions. Further research with more explicit methods is needed.
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
Cited by
Diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy
Kittler, H., Pehamberger, H., Wolff, K., & Binder, M. (2002) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(02)00679-4 · Cited by 1,349
Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions – a valuable tool for early
Argenziano, G., & Soyer, H. P. (2001) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(00)00422-8 · Cited by 391
Bono, A., Tolomio, E., Trincone, S., Bartoli, C., Tomatis, S., Carbone, A., & Santinami, M. (2006) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2006.07396.x · Cited by 78
Chen, J. Y., Fernandez, K., Fadadu, R. P., Reddy, R., Kim, M.-O., Tan, J., & Wei, M. L. (2025) · JAMA Dermatology · doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2024.4382 · Cited by 43
Dermoscopy of Pigmented Seborrheic Keratosis: A Morphological Study
Braun, R. P. (2002) · Archives of Dermatology · doi:10.1001/archderm.138.12.1556
Metadata
- Authors
- Mayer, J.
- Venue
- Medical Journal of Australia
- Publisher
- AMPCo
- Published
- 1997-08
- Volume
- 167
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 206-210
- ISSN
- 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
- 1326-5377
- OpenAlex
- W1820264760
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.13
- 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: Systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of dermatoscopy in detecting malignant melanoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1997.tb138847.x
- The paper
- Mayer, J. (1997). Systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of dermatoscopy in detecting malignant melanoma. Medical Journal of Australia. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1997.tb138847.x
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.