0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Review | Evidence-Based Dermatology

Risk Prediction Models for Incident Primary Cutaneous Melanoma A Systematic Review

Kylie Vuong, MIPH, MBBS1; Kevin McGeechan, PhD2; Bruce K. Armstrong, PhD1; Anne E. Cust, PhD, MPH (Hons)1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Cancer Epidemiology and Services Research, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
2Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150(4):434-444. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.8890.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  Currently, there is no comprehensive assessment of melanoma risk prediction models.

Objective  To systematically review published studies reporting multivariable risk prediction models for incident primary cutaneous melanoma for adults.

Evidence Review  EMBASE, MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, and Cochrane databases were searched to April 30, 2013. Eligible studies were hand searched and citation tracked. Two independent reviewers extracted information.

Findings  Nineteen studies reporting 28 melanoma prediction models were included. The number of predictors in the final models ranged from 2 to 13; the most common were nevi, skin type, freckle density, age, hair color, and sunburn history. There was limited reporting and substantial variation among the studies in model development and performance. Discrimination (the ability of the model to differentiate between patients with and without melanoma) was reported in 9 studies and ranged from fair to very good (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.62-0.86). Few studies assessed internal or external validity of the models or their use in clinical and public health practice. Of the published melanoma risk prediction models, the risk prediction tool developed by Fears and colleagues, which was designed for the US population, appears to be the most clinically useful and may also assist in identifying high-risk groups for melanoma prevention strategies.

Conclusions and Relevance  Few melanoma risk prediction models have been comprehensively developed and assessed. More external validation and prospective evaluation will help translate melanoma risk prediction models into useful tools for clinical and public health practice.

Figures in this Article

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Flow Diagram for Identification of Studies

Description of the identification of studies at the different phases of the systematic review.

Graphic Jump Location

Tables

References

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

1,698 Views
11 Citations
×

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
JAMAevidence.com

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Melanoma

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Make the Diagnosis: Melanoma

brightcove.createExperiences();