Skip to main content
QMSQMS
QMS
  • Welcome to your QMS
  • Quality Manual
  • Procedures
  • Records
  • Legit.Health Plus Version 1.1.0.0
  • Legit.Health Plus Version 1.1.0.1
  • Legit.Health version 2.1 (Legacy MDD)
  • Legit.Health US Version 1.1.0.0
  • Legit.Health Utilities
  • Licenses and accreditations
  • Applicable Standards and Regulations
  • BSI Non-Conformities
    • Technical Review
    • Clinical Review
      • Round 1
        • Item 0: Background & Action Plan
        • Item 1: CER Update Frequency
        • Item 2: Device Description & Claims
        • Item 3: Clinical Data
        • Item 4: Usability
        • Item 5: PMS Plan
        • Item 6: PMCF Plan
        • Item 7: Risk
        • completed-tasks
          • task-3b10-legacy-pms-document-hierarchy-refactor
          • task-3b11-sme-coverage-subspecialty-documentation
          • task-3b12-phase-1-exploratory-per-bucket-c-feature
          • task-3b13-man-2025-cep-cip-completeness
          • task-3b14-ifu-integration-requirements-verification
          • task-3b4-mrmc-dark-phototypes
          • task-3b6-surrogate-endpoint-literature-review
            • Appraisal log — CRIT1–7 rolling table
            • Do we need this task?
            • Integration map — propagation of the surrogate-endpoint validity review
            • references
              • diagnostic-accuracy
              • referral-optimisation
                • Armstrong 2018 — Online vs in-person care for psoriasis: equivalency RCT
                • Chuchu 2018 — Cochrane review: teledermatology for diagnosing skin cancer in adults
                • Eminović 2009 — Cluster RCT: teledermatology reduces dermatology referrals
                • Finnane 2017 — Teledermatology for the diagnosis and management of skin cancer: systematic review
                • Giavina-Bianchi 2020 — Teledermatology reduces referrals and waiting times (São Paulo, 30,976 patients)
                • Jain 2021 — AI tool for skin-condition diagnosis by PCPs and NPs in teledermatology
                • Moreno-Ramirez 2007 — Store-and-forward teledermatology in skin-cancer triage (Seville, 2,009 teleconsultations)
                • Snoswell 2016 — Cost-effectiveness of store-and-forward teledermatology: systematic review
                • Whited 2013 — Clinical-course outcomes: store-and-forward teledermatology vs. conventional consultation RCT
              • severity-assessment
            • Research prompts — external deep-research tools
            • Surrogate-Endpoint Validity in Dermatology AI — Structured Literature Review
          • task-3b7-icd-per-epidemiological-group-vv
          • task-3b8-safety-confirmation-column-definition
          • task-3b9-legacy-pms-conclusions-into-plus-pms-plan
        • Coverage matrix
        • resources
        • Task 3b-5: Autoimmune and Genodermatoses Triangulated-Evidence Package
      • Evidence rank & phases
      • Pre-submission review of R-TF-015-001 CEP and R-TF-015-003 CER
  • Pricing
  • Public tenders
  • Trainings
  • BSI Non-Conformities
  • Clinical Review
  • Round 1
  • completed-tasks
  • task-3b6-surrogate-endpoint-literature-review
  • references
  • referral-optimisation
  • Finnane 2017 — Teledermatology for the diagnosis and management of skin cancer: systematic review

Finnane 2017 — Teledermatology for the diagnosis and management of skin cancer: systematic review

Citation​

Finnane A, Dallest K, Janda M, Soyer HP. Teledermatology for the Diagnosis and Management of Skin Cancer: A Systematic Review. JAMA Dermatol. 2017 Mar 1;153(3):319–327. DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.4361. PMID 27926766.

Study design and population​

PROSPERO-registered systematic review. 21 studies evaluating teledermatology accuracy, efficiency and clinical outcomes for skin cancer vs. face-to-face assessment. 6 databases searched to April 2016.

Reported metrics​

  • Face-to-face diagnostic concordance with histopathology: 67–85 % (Cohen κ ≈ 0.90)
  • Teledermatology concordance with histopathology: 51–85 % (κ 0.41–0.63)
  • Teledermoscopy consistently outperformed macroscopic teledermatology
  • Consistent waiting-time reductions and shortened time-to-treatment across included studies (narrative synthesis; no pooled CI)

Surrogate-to-outcome linkage​

Establishes diagnostic concordance of teledermatology with in-person reference standard as sufficient to support triage use; consistent reduction in time-to-assessment and time-to-treatment anchors the access-to-care surrogate to the downstream earlier-treatment outcome. Foundational SR for the EU HTA / NICE assessment literature on teledermatology pathway redesign.

CRIT1–7 appraisal​

CriterionScoreJustification
CRIT1 Relevance3Direct — skin-cancer teledermatology systematic review.
CRIT2 Methodology3PROSPERO-registered; 6-database search; QUADAS-2 applied.
CRIT3 Reporting2Narrative synthesis (heterogeneity precluded pooling); no pooled CIs.
CRIT4 Applicability3International literature, directly applicable.
CRIT5 Evidence weight3Systematic review.
CRIT6 Risk of bias2Heterogeneous primary studies; many observational; QUADAS-2 concerns.
CRIT7 Contribution3Core evidence base for remote-assessment adequacy as a Pillar-1 surrogate.

Aggregate: very strong.

Limitations and notes​

Heterogeneity precluded meta-analytic pooling; pre-smartphone-era studies under-represent modern imaging workflows.

Strength as anchor​

Very strong for the accepted-surrogate and directional claims in Domain 3. Cross-referenced in Domain 1 (diagnostic-accuracy teledermatology concordance). Pairs with Bourkas 2023 and Chuchu 2018 Cochrane to span the systematic-review evidence base.

Previous
Eminović 2009 — Cluster RCT: teledermatology reduces dermatology referrals
Next
Giavina-Bianchi 2020 — Teledermatology reduces referrals and waiting times (São Paulo, 30,976 patients)
  • Citation
  • Study design and population
  • Reported metrics
  • Surrogate-to-outcome linkage
  • CRIT1–7 appraisal
  • Limitations and notes
  • Strength as anchor
All the information contained in this QMS is confidential. The recipient agrees not to transmit or reproduce the information, neither by himself nor by third parties, through whichever means, without obtaining the prior written permission of Legit.Health (AI Labs Group S.L.)