Conductas de autoexamen cutáneo en dermatólogos chilenos / Cutaneous self-examination behaviors in Chilean dermatologistc

La incidencia de cáncer de piel ha aumentado, por lo que la detección precoz puede ser beneficiosa. Se ha sugerido que los dermatólogos son una población de alto riesgo para desarrollar cáncer de piel. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la frecuencia de autoexamen, consulta dermatológica y cáncer de piel en un grupo de dermatólogos chilenos. Pacientes y métodos: Se confeccionó una encuesta de 8 preguntas, hecha personalmente, durante 4 meses, a 143 dermatólogos de la Sociedad Chilena de Dermatología (46,7%). Las variables analizadas fueron: sexo, edad, fototipo de Fitzpatrick, frecuencia de autoexamen, consulta a otro dermatólogo, antecedente de melanoma maligno (MM), carcinoma basocelular (CBC), carcinoma espinocelular (CEC) y queratosis actínica (QA), y razones para no realizarse examen cutáneo en forma regular. Resultados: El 60% de encuestados se hacía autoexamen, pero 48% afirmó hacerlo sólo ocasionalmente. Con respecto a si solicitan ser evaluados por otro dermatólogo, el 81% no lo hace, del 19% que si lo hace, un 69% consultaba sólo ante una lesión llamativa. Finalmente, el 17% de encuestados refirió haber tenido neoplasias cutáneas. Entre ellas 12% para QA, 5% para CBC, 2% para CEC y ningún melanoma. Conclusión: La mayoría de los dermatólogos encuestados se realiza autoexamen, pero no regularmente, y raramente hacen consultas de chequeo a sus colegas, la mayoría solicita evaluación por otro dermatólogo ante una lesión sospechosa.

Abstract: Skin cancer incidence has increased worldwide; early detection may be beneficial. Some evidence suggests dermatologists as a high-risk population for developing skin cancer. The aim of this study was to assess how often Chilean dermatologists consult with colleagues for check ups, to evaluate the frequency of self-skin examination and the frequency of skin cancer in this group. Patients and methods: A sample of 143 members (46,7%) of the Chilean Society of Dermatology responded an eight items questionnaire, in a face-to-face manner. Evaluated variables were: sex, age, Fitzpatrick phototype, self-skin examination frequency, frequency for consult s with another dermatologist, previous history of malignant melanoma, basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma and actinic keratosis, and reasons to perform or not in themselves regular skin examination. Results: 60% performed regular self-skin examination, but only 48% did it regularly. Concerning whether they consulted another dermatologist, 81% didn´t, and between the 19% who do consult, 69% of them consulted only in case of a suspicious lesion. Finally, 17% of the surveyed people referred history of skin cancer. 12% were actinic keratosis, 5% basal cell carcinoma, 2% squamous cell carcinoma and no melanoma was declared. Conclusion: Most of surveyed dermatologists perform occasional self-skin examination, and rarely do regular check ups with colleagues, most of them consulted another dermatologist only if a suspicious lesion was found.

Factors influencing citations to systematic reviews in skin diseases: a cross-sectional study through Web of Sciences and Scopus.

BACKGROUND: Disseminating information derived from systematic reviews is a fundamental step for translating evidence into practice. OBJECTIVE: To determine which features of dermatological SR are associated with systematic review dissemination, using citation rates as an indicator. METHODS: Dermatological systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2012 were obtained from Scopus, the ISI Web of Sciences and the Cochrane Skin Group. Bibliometric data of every systematic review were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 320 systematic reviews were analyzed. Univariable analysis showed that the journal impact factor, number of authors, and total references cited were positively associated with the number of citations. There was a significant difference in the median number of citations with regard to the corresponding author's country, type of skin disease, type of funding, and presence of international collaboration. Cochrane reviews were significantly associated with a lower number of citations. Multivariable analysis found that the number of authors, number of references cited and the corresponding author from United Kingdom were independently correlated with many citations. Cochrane systematic reviews tended to be independently associated with a lower number of citations. CONCLUSIONS: Citation number to systematic reviews may be improving by increasing the number of authors, especially collaborative authors, and the number of cited references. The reasons for the association of Cochrane SRs with fewer citations should be addressed in future studies.

Factors influencing citations to systematic reviews in skin diseases: a cross-sectional study through Web of Sciences and Scopus

AbstractBACKGROUND:Disseminating information derived from systematic reviews is a fundamental step for translating evidence into practice.OBJECTIVE:To determine which features of dermatological SR are associated with systematic review dissemination, using citation rates as an indicator.METHODS:Dermatological systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2012 were obtained from Scopus, the ISI Web of Sciences and the Cochrane Skin Group. Bibliometric data of every systematic review were collected and analyzed.RESULTS:A total of 320 systematic reviews were analyzed. Univariable analysis showed that the journal impact factor, number of authors, and total references cited were positively associated with the number of citations. There was a significant difference in the median number of citations with regard to the corresponding author's country, type of skin disease, type of funding, and presence of international collaboration. Cochrane reviews were significantly associated with a lower number of citations. Multivariable analysis found that the number of authors, number of references cited and the corresponding author from United Kingdom were independently correlated with many citations. Cochrane systematic reviews tended to be independently associated with a lower number of citations.CONCLUSIONS:Citation number to systematic reviews may be improving by increasing the number of authors, especially collaborative authors, and the number of cited references. The reasons for the association of Cochrane SRs with fewer citations should be addressed in future studies.