Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40698879›Full record

ReviewMelanoma management2025

Screening and novel diagnostic technologies for melanoma: an update.

Jonathan C Hwang, Bryan L Peacker, Rebecca I Hartman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Melanoma management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Overdiagnosis of Melanoma In Situ.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jonathan C HwangUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Bryan L PeackerDepartment of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Rebecca I HartmanDepartment of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

CSRD VA IK2 CX002531
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Melanoma incidence has increased over recent decades, yet mortality has been relatively stable. This pattern has raised concern that many newly diagnosed melanomas, particularly melanoma in situ, may reflect overdiagnosis rather than a true increase in disease burden. Screening can detect melanoma earlier but is likely associated with overdiagnosis and overdetection, which may lead to excess morbidity with little survival benefit. This review examines global trends in melanoma incidence and mortality, the effects of screening programs, and the consequences of overdiagnosis. We evaluate both population-based and risk-directed screening strategies and assess diagnostic tools such as dermoscopy, total body photography, and artificial intelligence devices. Further research is needed to determine how these adjunctive technologies can be effectively integrated into screening strategies to improve clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Cancerdiagnosisepidemiologyoncologyoverdiagnosispreventionskin cancer screeningskin (melanoma)

Identifiers

PMID40698879
PMCPMC12551410

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.