 |
|
Accuracy of Computer Diagnosis of Melanoma—Editor's Comment
Rosamaria Corona, DSc, MD
Arch Dermatol. 2003;139:366.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
This study offers thorough scrutiny of the methodological problems that affect the studies performed in this new and underexplored field of computer-assisted melanoma diagnosis. The authors discuss the limitations of the studies, including selection and verification bias, unclear inclusion and exclusion criteria, the lack of use of an independent test set, and the absence of interinstrument and intrainstrument reproducibility assessment. The authors conclude that the results of all these studies need to be interpreted with caution, and they suggest a list of minimum requirements for future studies to ensure better methodological quality.
In spite of the rapid development of new diagnostic techniques, critical assessment of the methodology of diagnostic research is still underdeveloped. Readers interested in knowing more about diagnostic testing can refer to the following articles: Knottnerus JA, van Weel C, Muris JW. Evaluation of diagnostic procedures. BMJ. 2002;324:477-480. Jaeschke R, Guyatt G, Sackett . . . [Full Text of this Article]
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Accuracy of Computer Diagnosis of Melanoma: A Quantitative Meta-analysis
Barbara Rosado, Scott Menzies, Alexandra Harbauer, Hubert Pehamberger, Klaus Wolff, Michael Binder, and Harald Kittler
Arch Dermatol. 2003;139(3):361-367.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
