↓ Skip to main content

Tips and tricks in the dermoscopy of pigmented lesions

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Dermatology, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#20 of 133)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tips and tricks in the dermoscopy of pigmented lesions
Published in
BMC Dermatology, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-5945-12-14
Pubmed ID
Authors

Grazyna Kaminska-Winciorek, Radoslaw Spiewak

Abstract

Dermoscopy is a useful, widely used tool for examining pigmented lesions, especially helpful in cases of an uncertain nature. Nevertheless, doctors may experience diagnostic difficulties while using this method. An example of this may be found in the examination of subcorneal hematoma, dark nevi with black lamella or lesions of acral volar skin. In such cases, a few diagnostic tricks have proven to be helpful in achieving diagnostic accuracy. This paper reviews various methods of performing dermoscopy, suggesting a number of simple, yet helpful tests. These include the adhesive tape test, the skin scraping test and the ink furrow test. The adhesive tape test is helpful in differentiating between dark melanocytic nevi and melanoma. Hematoma may be more easily differentiated with the use of the so-called skin scraping test. The confirmation of benign and melanocytic lesions of acral volar skin, on the other hand, is more accurate when using the ink furrow test. These methods have been discussed here based upon a series of literature reviews, the authors' own experience and, also, iconography. The present article describes novel methods used in dermoscopy, helping to bring about a faster, more accurate diagnostics of those lesions which have proven to be more difficult to recognize. Helpful tricks, such as have been known to professional literature, as well as the authors' own experience (for instance, applying urea cream to hyperkeratotic lesions or using photographs of skin lesions taken with the aid of a mobile phone camera--all prior to surgery) will surely be considered beneficial to the practitioner, be it dermatologist or any other physician.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 65 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 9 13%
Student > Master 9 13%
Other 8 12%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 14 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 November 2021.
All research outputs
#2,754,098
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from BMC Dermatology
#20
of 133 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,224
of 169,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Dermatology
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 133 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 169,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.