2021
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-264883/v1
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Can Patient-Led Surveillance Detect Subsequent New Primary or Recurrent Melanomas and Reduce the Need for Routinely Scheduled Follow Up? A Protocol for the MEL-SELF Randomised Controlled Trial.

Abstract: Background: Most subsequent new primary or recurrent melanomas might be self-detected if patients are trained to systematically self-examine their skin and have access to timely medical review (patient-led surveillance). Routinely scheduled clinic visits (clinician-led surveillance) is resource-intensive and has not been shown to improve health outcomes; fewer visits may be possible if patient-led surveillance is shown to be safe and effective. The MEL-SELF trial is a randomised controlled trial comparing pati… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

2
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This prevented any meaningful comparison between randomised groups, and any notional difference in costs or impacts should not be interpreted as a true difference between the study groups. We have improved data collection processes in a larger RCT of the same MEL-SELF intervention that is underway, including use of a digital diary to measure health resource use [32]. Second, the current study is limited in scope, particularly for the environmental impact estimates, which were limited to patient transport to treating melanoma clinic appointments only and did not include travel for other clinics or healthcare use, nor emissions related to the manufacture and use of the mobile dermatoscope, or the delivery of healthcare services.…”
Section: Limitations Of Our Approach To Include Environmental Impacts...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This prevented any meaningful comparison between randomised groups, and any notional difference in costs or impacts should not be interpreted as a true difference between the study groups. We have improved data collection processes in a larger RCT of the same MEL-SELF intervention that is underway, including use of a digital diary to measure health resource use [32]. Second, the current study is limited in scope, particularly for the environmental impact estimates, which were limited to patient transport to treating melanoma clinic appointments only and did not include travel for other clinics or healthcare use, nor emissions related to the manufacture and use of the mobile dermatoscope, or the delivery of healthcare services.…”
Section: Limitations Of Our Approach To Include Environmental Impacts...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• Improvements in skin cancer risk-prediction tools by incorporating imaging data of dermoscopic and phenotypic features, and genomic data • Evaluation of advanced digital diagnostic technologies and artificial intelligence, in the clinic and by consumers • Identifying clinical, dermoscopic and molecular features of indolent and aggressive melanomas and other skin cancers impact of mobile teledermoscopy in melanoma patient follow-up care and whether the technology may assist with melanoma diagnosis between routinely scheduled in-person care. 37 Previous research has found that patients identify up to 40% of melanoma recurrences 38 , and this technology may further assist with a more rapid diagnosis. Moving to patient-led surveillance would require improvement of SSE education and practice, which is currently suboptimal in the general population, with studies suggesting that few people carry out SSE thoroughly.…”
Section: The Future Of Skin Cancer Early Detection In Australiamentioning
confidence: 99%