Early Detection of Skin Cancer by Family Physicians: A Pilot Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Malignant melanoma is rising quickly in incidence and mortality rates. Family physicians (FPs) have been reported to lack confidence in diagnosing skin cancers. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether an educational intervention can improve FPs' abilities to diagnose skin cancers. Methods: The design was a prospective, randomized trial which included a skin cancer questionnaire, a video intervention, and a skin biopsy review. Results: Pre-intervention, FPs answered 57% of the questions correctly on the skin cancer questionnaire. Post-intervention, the video intervention group scored higher than did the control group. The video intervention group removed 10% fewer benign lesions and almost 3 times more malignant lesions compared with their pre-intervention biopsy rate. No findings were statistically significant. Conclusion: An educational intervention may improve FPs' knowledge and diagnosis of skin cancer. Our results may guide future studies with larger sample sizes in developing a skin cancer continuing medical education (CME) course for FPs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".