Dermatofibroma mimicking melanoma dermoscopically
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conflict of interest: none declared. Dermoscopy is a noninvasive tool that can help to either confirm a clinical diagnosis or show features that disprove a diagnosis made based on clinical grounds. Dermatofibroma (DF) is a very common nonmelanocytic skin tumour that can have dermoscopic features of melanocytic neoplasms. Zalaudek et al.1 reported a case of a melanoma with the classic clinical features of DF; it was correctly diagnosed based on the atypical dermoscopic features, and excised. We report a case that seemed to be similar, with the clinical diagnosis being DF but the atypical dermoscopic features being suggestive of a melanoma; however, in this case the lesion was in fact a DF. A 57‐year‐old man presented with a 5‐year history of a lesion on his back. On physical examination, there was a tender firm purple‐brown nodule, 30 × 20 mm in size, with an isolated area of irregular pigmentation (Fig. 1a) was seen. The ‘dimple sign’ was positive. Based on these clinical findings, the initial clinical impression was of a DF.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".