MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416046323 · doi:10.2196/77443

Diagnostic Accuracy, Implementation Barriers, and Equity Implications of Teledermatology in Rural Skin Cancer: Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4416046323 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andres D Parga, Dorothy S Peng, Selene M Kizy, Aisha Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Dermatology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeledermatologyEquity (law)Health equityTelemedicineMEDLINEHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Skin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in the United States, with rural populations facing disproportionate delays in diagnosis due to geographic isolation, workforce shortages, and limited access to dermatologic care. These delays contribute to higher rates of late-stage diagnosis and poorer outcomes. Teledermatology has emerged as a promising solution to expand access to dermatologic evaluation and treatment in underserved settings. Objective: The review aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance, implementation challenges, and equity considerations of teledermatology in the context of rural skin cancer care, and to assess its potential to improve clinical outcomes in underserved populations. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify studies published between January 2015 and March 2025. Search terms included "teledermatology," "skin cancer," "rural health services," "telemedicine," "diagnostic accuracy," and "health disparities." Studies evaluating diagnostic metrics, time to diagnosis, patient satisfaction, and implementation barriers were included. Results: Nine key studies spanning various countries and health care settings were included. Diagnostic sensitivity ranged from 41.9% to 100%, and specificity from 46% to 90%, depending on modality and lesion type. Teledermatology consistently reduced time to diagnosis, in some cases by over 75%, and was associated with high patient satisfaction due to increased convenience and reduced travel. Key barriers included technological limitations, inconsistent imaging protocols, and reimbursement variability. Successful implementation was facilitated by standardized workflows, dermoscopy integration, and centralized platforms. Conclusions: Teledermatology is a viable and effective approach to addressing disparities in rural skin cancer care. It offers diagnostic accuracy comparable to face-to-face evaluations while reducing wait times and improving patient satisfaction. Overcoming technological and systemic barriers is critical to ensuring equitable, long-term integration of teledermatology in rural health systems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.419 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR DermatologySame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207