Article

3 Iconography
Access to the text (HTML) Access to the text (HTML)
PDF Access to the PDF text
Advertising


Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription.
  • If you are a subscriber, please sign in 'My Account' at the top right of the screen.

  • If you want to subscribe to this journal, see our rates



Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
Volume 74, n° 6
pages 1093-1106 (juin 2016)
Doi : 10.1016/j.jaad.2015.12.038
accepted : 20 December 2015
Original Articles

Standardization of terminology in dermoscopy/dermatoscopy: Results of the third consensus conference of the International Society of Dermoscopy
 

Harald Kittler, MD a, , Ashfaq A. Marghoob, MD b, Giuseppe Argenziano, MD c, Cristina Carrera, MD d, Clara Curiel-Lewandrowski, MD e, Rainer Hofmann-Wellenhof, MD f, Josep Malvehy, MD d, Scott Menzies, MBBS g, Susana Puig, MD d, Harold Rabinovitz, MD h, Wilhelm Stolz, MD i, Toshiaki Saida, MD j, H. Peter Soyer, MD k, Eliot Siegel, MD l, William V. Stoecker, MD m, Alon Scope, MD b, n, Masaru Tanaka, MD o, Luc Thomas, MD p, Philipp Tschandl, MD a, Iris Zalaudek, MD f, Allan Halpern, MD b
a Department of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria 
b Dermatology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 
c Dermatology and Skin Cancer Unit, Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Reggio Emilia, Italy 
d 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 
e University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, Arizona 
f Department of Dermatology and Venerology, Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Unit, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria 
g Sydney Melanoma Diagnostic Center, Sydney Cancer Center, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia 
h Skin and Cancer Associates, Plantation, Florida 
i Department of Dermatology, Klinikum München, Munich, Germany 
j Department of Dermatology, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Matsumoto, Japan 
k Dermatology Research Center, University of Queensland, School of Medicine, Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia 
l University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland 
m Department of Dermatology, University of Missouri Health Sciences Center, Columbia, Missouri 
n Department of Dermatology, Sheba Medical Center and Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel 
o Department of Dermatology, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan 
p Service de Dermatologie, Center Hospitalier Universitaire de Lyon, Lyon, France 

Reprint requests: Harald Kittler, MD, Department of Dermatology, Division of General Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria.Department of DermatologyDivision of General DermatologyMedical University of ViennaWähringer Gürtel 18-20Vienna1090Austria
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.

The full text of this article is available in PDF format.

Key words : consensus, dermatoscopy, melanoma, nevi, noninvasive diagnosis, nonmelanoma skin cancer, pigmented skin lesions, terminology



 Funding sources: None.
 Conflicts of interest: None declared.



© 2015  American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.@@#104156@@
EM-CONSULTE.COM is registrered at the CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.
As per the Law relating to information storage and personal integrity, you have the right to oppose (art 26 of that law), access (art 34 of that law) and rectify (art 36 of that law) your personal data. You may thus request that your data, should it be inaccurate, incomplete, unclear, outdated, not be used or stored, be corrected, clarified, updated or deleted.
Personal information regarding our website's visitors, including their identity, is confidential.
The owners of this website hereby guarantee to respect the legal confidentiality conditions, applicable in France, and not to disclose this data to third parties.
Close
Article Outline