The effect of an educational programme to improve the skills of general practitioners in diagnosing melanocytic/pigmented lesions

Youl, Philippa; Raasch, Beverley; Janda, Monika; Aitken, Joanne F.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2230.2007.02414.x

Cited by 37 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, instruction on management options ranged from triage and specialist referral to biopsies and definitive surgical management. The Basic Skin Cancer Triage course, Skin Watch program, and the Melanoma Education for Primary Care program were notable for including five of six curricular components, presenting very thorough descriptions of the educational components, and undergoing repeated evaluation [33][34][35][36][37][38][39] . The aforementioned interventions each received funding on a national level or from large independent funds.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aforementioned interventions each received funding on a national level or from large independent funds. Dermoscopy is a recent and novel addition to a PCP skin cancer curriculum, being a component of the curriculum for only two interventions and first appearing as part of an intervention in 2006 34,40 . The decision to introduce dermoscopy to nondermatologists and the best method to teach it have been debated, given that it is difficult to learn without formal training 41 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instruction on dermoscopy was included for two (15%) interventions. Only one (8%) intervention utilized a needs assessment during curriculum development 33,34 .…”

Section: Curriculummentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Skin Cancer Education for Primary Care Physicians: A Systematic Review of Published Evaluated Interventions

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Early detection of melanoma may provide an opportunity to positively impact melanoma mortality. Numerous skin cancer educational interventions have been developed for primary care physicians (PCPs) to improve diagnostic accuracy. Standardized training is also a prerequisite for formal testing of melanoma screening in the primary care setting. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to determine the extent of evaluated interventions designed to educate PCPs about skin cancer, including melanoma. DESIGN: Relevant studies in the English language were identified through systemic searches performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and Cochrane through December 2010. Supplementary information was obtained from corresponding authors of the included studies when necessary. APPROACH: Studies eligible for inclusion formally evaluated skin cancer education interventions and were designed primarily for PCPs. Excluded studies lacked a specified training intervention, used decision-making software, focused solely on risk factor identification, or did not directly educate or assess participants. Twenty studies met the selection criteria. Data were extracted according to intervention content and delivery format, and study outcomes.KEY RESULTS: All interventions included instructions about skin cancer diagnosis, but otherwise varied in content. Curricula utilized six distinct educational techniques, usually incorporating more than one. Intervention duration varied from 12 min to over 6 h. Eight of the 20 studies were randomized trials. Most studies (18/20, 90%) found a significant improvement in at least one of the following five outcome categories: knowledge, competence, confidence, diagnostic performance, or systems outcomes. Competence was most commonly measured; no study evaluated all categories. Variability in study design, interventions, and outcome measures prevented correlation of outcomes with intervention characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the development of many isolated educational interventions, few have been tested rigorously or evaluated under sufficient standardized conditions to allow for quantitative comparison. Improved and rigorously tested skin cancer educational interventions for PCPs with outcome measures focusing on changes in performance are needed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Skin Cancer Education for Primary Care Physicians: A Systematic Review of Published Evaluated Interventions

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies had a high risk of selection bias, [13][14][15][16][17]19,20,22,24,25,27,[29][30][31] with little information given (if any) about whether those who participated were different from those who chose not to take part. Almost all studies reported a follow-up period of less than 1 year; 11,14,[17][18][19]21,23,24,27,28,31,33 several tested participants straight after the intervention; 15,16,29,30 and some did not include or state any follow-up period. 20,22,25,32 Therefore, it cannot be determined whether any of the reported improvements persisted.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The low-quality before-and-after studies did show significant improvement in outcomes. 17,33 Decision-support software and guideline use Four studies, including three good-quality RCTs, tested computer-based interventions to change PHP behaviour. 20,23,26,32 These studies were designed to improve the quality of referrals to secondary care as a proxy to reducing referral delay.…”

Section: Intervention Typementioning

confidence: 99%