Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
International Skin Imaging Collaboration‐Designated Diagnoses (ISIC‐DX): Consensus terminology for lesion diagnostic labeling. |
| Authors: |
Scope, Alon, Liopyris, Konstantinos, Weber, Jochen, Barnhill, Raymond L., Braun, Ralph P., Curiel‐Lewandrowski, Clara N., Elder, David E., Ferrara, Gerardo, Grant‐Kels, Jane M., Jeunon, Thiago, Lallas, Aimilios, Lin, Jennifer Y., Marchetti, Michael A., Marghoob, Ashfaq A., Navarrete‐Dechent, Cristian, Pellacani, Giovanni, Soyer, Hans Peter, Stratigos, Alexander, Thomas, Luc, Kittler, Harald |
| Source: |
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology & Venereology; Jan2025, Vol. 39 Issue 1, p117-125, 9p |
| Subject Terms: |
SKIN imaging, SKIN tumors, ARTIFICIAL intelligence, SYNONYMS, LEXICON |
| Abstract: |
Background: A common terminology for diagnosis is critically important for clinical communication, education, research and artificial intelligence. Prevailing lexicons are limited in fully representing skin neoplasms. Objectives: To achieve expert consensus on diagnostic terms for skin neoplasms and their hierarchical mapping. Methods: Diagnostic terms were extracted from textbooks, publications and extant diagnostic codes. Terms were hierarchically mapped to super‐categories (e.g. 'benign') and cellular/tissue‐differentiation categories (e.g. 'melanocytic'), and appended with pertinent‐modifiers and synonyms. These terms were evaluated using a modified‐Delphi consensus approach. Experts from the International‐Skin‐Imaging‐Collaboration (ISIC) were surveyed on agreement with terms and their hierarchical mapping; they could suggest modifying, deleting or adding terms. Consensus threshold was >75% for the initial rounds and >50% for the final round. Results: Eighteen experts completed all Delphi rounds. Of 379 terms, 356 (94%) reached consensus in round one. Eleven of 226 (5%) benign‐category terms, 6/140 (4%) malignant‐category terms and 6/13 (46%) indeterminate‐category terms did not reach initial agreement. Following three rounds, final consensus consisted of 362 terms mapped to 3 super‐categories and 41 cellular/tissue‐differentiation categories. Conclusions: We have created, agreed upon, and made public a taxonomy for skin neoplasms and their hierarchical mapping. Further study will be needed to evaluate the utility and completeness of the lexicon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology & Venereology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Complementary Index |
