...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of cutaneous pathology >Who sends what: a comparison of dermatopathology referrals from dermatologists, pathologists and dermatopathologists.
【24h】

Who sends what: a comparison of dermatopathology referrals from dermatologists, pathologists and dermatopathologists.

机译：谁发送的内容：皮肤科医生，病理学家和皮肤病理学家推荐的皮肤病理学比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

BACKGROUND: Dermatopathologists, dermatologists and pathologists interpret skin pathology specimens. OBJECTIVE: To examine dermatopathology referral patterns of dermatologists, pathologists and dermatopathologists. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed diagnoses rendered by one dermatopathologist to 916 primary interpretation cases (543 from university dermatologists and 373 from private practice dermatologists) and 517 consultations (450 from dermatologists, 52 from pathologists and 15 from dermatopathologists). Each diagnosis was assigned into one of six categories. Chi-square tests were used to compare referral types pairwise and correspondence analysis was performed. RESULTS: All profile comparisons tested significantly from each other (p-value < 0.01) except the comparison between dermatopathologists and pathologists. Correspondence analysis suggested that consultation profile of dermatopathologists was most dissimilar from other profiles and tended to associate more with the presence of malignant and benign melanocytic referral types. Referral pattern of pathologists was more similar to that of dermatologists who interpret skin pathology specimens than that of dermatopathologists. Limitations: Small sample size, referral bias, difficulty classifying certain lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Referral pattern of dermatopathologists was most dissimilar from other profiles and tended to associate more with malignant and benign melanocytic referral types. Referral pattern of pathologists was more similar to that of dermatologists who interpret skin pathology specimens than that of dermatopathologists.
机译：背景：皮肤病理学家，皮肤病学家和病理学家解释皮肤病理学标本。目的：研究皮肤科医生，病理学家和皮肤病理学家的皮肤病理学转诊模式。方法：我们回顾性分析了一位皮肤病理学家对916例原发性解释病例（543例来自大学皮肤科医生，373例来自私人执业皮肤科医生）和517诊症（450例皮肤科医生，52例病理学家和15例皮肤病理学家）的诊断。每种诊断均分为六类之一。卡方检验用于成对比较推荐人类型，并进行对应分析。结果：除皮肤病理学家和病理学家之间的比较外，所有其他特征比较均进行了显着测试（p值<0.01）。对应分析表明，皮肤病理学家的咨询概况与其他概况最为不同，并且倾向于与恶性和良性黑素细胞转诊类型相关。病理学家的转诊模式与解释皮肤病理学标本的皮肤科医生的转诊模式比皮肤病理学家的转诊模式更为相似。局限性：样本量小，推荐偏倚，难以对某些病变进行分类。结论：皮肤病理学家的转诊模式与其他情况最为不同，并且倾向于与恶性和良性黑素细胞转诊类型相关。病理学家的转诊模式与解释皮肤病理学标本的皮肤科医生的转诊模式比皮肤病理学家的转诊模式更为相似。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号