Harald Kittler1, Ashfaq A Marghoob2, Giuseppe Argenziano3, Cristina Carrera4, Clara Curiel-Lewandrowski5, Rainer Hofmann-Wellenhof6, Josep Malvehy4, Scott Menzies7, Susana Puig4, Harold Rabinovitz8, Wilhelm Stolz9, Toshiaki Saida10, H Peter Soyer11, Eliot Siegel12, William V Stoecker13, Alon Scope14, Masaru Tanaka15, Luc Thomas16, Philipp Tschandl17, Iris Zalaudek6, Allan Halpern2. 1. Department of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: harald.kittler@meduniwien.ac.at. 2. Dermatology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 3. Dermatology and Skin Cancer Unit, Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Reggio Emilia, Italy. 4. Melanoma Unit, Department of Dermatology, Hospital Clinic, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Universitat de Barcelona, and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Raras (CIBER ER), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Barcelona, Spain. 5. University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, Arizona. 6. Department of Dermatology and Venerology, Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Unit, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. 7. Sydney Melanoma Diagnostic Center, Sydney Cancer Center, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia. 8. Skin and Cancer Associates, Plantation, Florida. 9. Department of Dermatology, Klinikum München, Munich, Germany. 10. Department of Dermatology, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Matsumoto, Japan. 11. Dermatology Research Center, University of Queensland, School of Medicine, Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia. 12. University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland. 13. Department of Dermatology, University of Missouri Health Sciences Center, Columbia, Missouri. 14. Dermatology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Department of Dermatology, Sheba Medical Center and Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. 15. Department of Dermatology, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan. 16. Service de Dermatologie, Center Hospitalier Universitaire de Lyon, Lyon, France. 17. Department of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evolving dermoscopic terminology motivated us to initiate a new consensus. OBJECTIVE: We sought to establish a dictionary of standardized terms. METHODS: We reviewed the medical literature, conducted a survey, and convened a discussion among experts. RESULTS: Two competitive terminologies exist, a more metaphoric terminology that includes numerous terms and a descriptive terminology based on 5 basic terms. In a survey among members of the International Society of Dermoscopy (IDS) 23.5% (n = 201) participants preferentially use descriptive terminology, 20.1% (n = 172) use metaphoric terminology, and 484 (56.5%) use both. More participants who had been initially trained by metaphoric terminology prefer using descriptive terminology than vice versa (9.7% vs 2.6%, P < .001). Most new terms that were published since the last consensus conference in 2003 were unknown to the majority of the participants. There was uniform consensus that both terminologies are suitable, that metaphoric terms need definitions, that synonyms should be avoided, and that the creation of new metaphoric terms should be discouraged. The expert panel proposed a dictionary of standardized terms taking account of metaphoric and descriptive terms. LIMITATIONS: A consensus seeks a workable compromise but does not guarantee its implementation. CONCLUSION: The new consensus provides a revised framework of standardized terms to enhance the consistent use of dermoscopic terminology.
BACKGROUND: Evolving dermoscopic terminology motivated us to initiate a new consensus. OBJECTIVE: We sought to establish a dictionary of standardized terms. METHODS: We reviewed the medical literature, conducted a survey, and convened a discussion among experts. RESULTS: Two competitive terminologies exist, a more metaphoric terminology that includes numerous terms and a descriptive terminology based on 5 basic terms. In a survey among members of the International Society of Dermoscopy (IDS) 23.5% (n = 201) participants preferentially use descriptive terminology, 20.1% (n = 172) use metaphoric terminology, and 484 (56.5%) use both. More participants who had been initially trained by metaphoric terminology prefer using descriptive terminology than vice versa (9.7% vs 2.6%, P < .001). Most new terms that were published since the last consensus conference in 2003 were unknown to the majority of the participants. There was uniform consensus that both terminologies are suitable, that metaphoric terms need definitions, that synonyms should be avoided, and that the creation of new metaphoric terms should be discouraged. The expert panel proposed a dictionary of standardized terms taking account of metaphoric and descriptive terms. LIMITATIONS: A consensus seeks a workable compromise but does not guarantee its implementation. CONCLUSION: The new consensus provides a revised framework of standardized terms to enhance the consistent use of dermoscopic terminology.
Authors: Steven Q Wang; Stephen W Dusza; Alon Scope; Ralph P Braun; Alfred W Kopf; Ashfaq A Marghoob Journal: Dermatol Surg Date: 2008-07-14 Impact factor: 3.398
Authors: Ralph Peter Braun; Harold S Rabinovitz; Joachim Krischer; Jürgen Kreusch; Margaret Oliviero; Luigi Naldi; Alfred W Kopf; Jean H Saurat Journal: Arch Dermatol Date: 2002-12
Authors: Maria A Pizzichetta; Vincenzo Canzonieri; Peter H Soyer; Pietro Rubegni; Renato Talamini; Cesare Massone Journal: Am J Dermatopathol Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 1.533
Authors: Andreas Blum; Friedrich A Bahmer; Jürgen Bauer; Ralph P Braun; Brigitte Coras-Stepanek; Teresa Deinlein; Thomas Eigentler; Christine Fink; Claus Garbe; Holger A Haenssle; Rainer Hofmann-Wellenhof; Harald Kittler; Jürgen Kreusch; Hubert Pehamberger; Hans Schulz; H Peter Soyer; Wilhelm Stolz; Philipp Tschandl; Iris Zalaudek Journal: Hautarzt Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 0.751
Authors: Cristian Navarrete-Dechent; Konstantinos Liopyris; Ayelet Rishpon; Nadeem G Marghoob; Miguel Cordova; Stephen W Dusza; Aditi Sahu; Kivanc Kose; Margaret Oliviero; Harold Rabinovitz; Klaus J Busam; Michael A Marchetti; Chih-Chan J Chen; Ashfaq A Marghoob Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: C Navarrete-Dechent; M Cordova; K Liopyris; A Rishpon; S Aleissa; A M Rossi; E Lee; C-C J Chen; K J Busam; A A Marghoob; K S Nehal Journal: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol Date: 2019-08-23 Impact factor: 6.166
Authors: A Blum; J Kreusch; W Stolz; H Haenssle; R Braun; R Hofmann-Wellenhof; P Tschandl; I Zalaudek; H Kittler Journal: Hautarzt Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 0.751
Authors: Philipp Tschandl; Cliff Rosendahl; Bengu Nisa Akay; Giuseppe Argenziano; Andreas Blum; Ralph P Braun; Horacio Cabo; Jean-Yves Gourhant; Jürgen Kreusch; Aimilios Lallas; Jan Lapins; Ashfaq Marghoob; Scott Menzies; Nina Maria Neuber; John Paoli; Harold S Rabinovitz; Christoph Rinner; Alon Scope; H Peter Soyer; Christoph Sinz; Luc Thomas; Iris Zalaudek; Harald Kittler Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Konstantinos Liopyris; Cristian Navarrete-Dechent; Stephen W Dusza; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Liang Deng; Barbara B Wilson; Michael A Marchetti Journal: Australas J Dermatol Date: 2018-11-18 Impact factor: 2.875