MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214919354 · doi:10.2196/36896

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Dermatology Practice Worldwide: Results of a Survey Promoted by the International Dermoscopy Society

2022· article· en· W4214919354 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Claudio Conforti

Bibliographic record

VenueIproceedings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeledermatologyMedicineRashPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DermatologyFamily medicineComputer-assisted web interviewingSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Skin cancerTelemedicineHealth carePathologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The International Dermoscopy Society (IDS) conducted an online survey to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on the daily practice of dermatologists working with patients with skin cancer, to collect data regarding the frequency of skin manifestations noticed by the members, and to obtain information about the use of teledermatology during the pandemic. Objective The aims of this study are to identify changes within dermatology departments during lockdowns, to evaluate the use of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to find the most frequent cutaneous manifestations associated with COVID-19. Methods All IDS members (approximately 160,000 members) were asked to fill in a questionnaire sent by email. The questionnaire was available in English and was anonymous, with a compiling time of less than 5 minutes. The survey was open for 30 days (from April 24, 2020, to May 24, 2020) and it could only be filled out once. Results Overall, 678 dermatologists responded to the questionnaire; of these, 334 members stated that there had been a reduction of more than 75% in daily work activity during the pandemic, 265 dermatologists worked fewer days per week, and 118 experienced telemedicine for the first time. Acrodermatitis was the most frequently observed skin manifestation (n=80), followed by urticarial rash (n=69), morbilliform rash (n=53), and purpuric manifestation (n=40). Regarding the role of teledermatology, 565 dermatologists reported an increased number of teleconsultations, and the number of melanomas diagnosed during the pandemic was practically 0 for 385 (56.8%) respondents. Conclusions This survey highlights that the outbreak had a negative impact on most dermatology services, with a significant reduction in consultation time spent for patients with chronic conditions, and an increased risk of missed melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer diagnosis. Moreover, our study confirms earlier findings of a wide range of skin manifestations associated with COVID-19. Conflicts of Interest None declared.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.119
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIproceedingsSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207