Published on in Vol 8 (2025)

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/63861, first published .
The Prevalence of Dermoscopy Use Among Dermatology Residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Cross-Sectional Study

The Prevalence of Dermoscopy Use Among Dermatology Residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Cross-Sectional Study

The Prevalence of Dermoscopy Use Among Dermatology Residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Cross-Sectional Study

1College of Medicine, Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

2Department of Dermatology, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

3Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Corresponding Author:

Abdullah Almeziny, MBBS


Background: Dermoscopy is a noninvasive technology used to examine the skin’s invisible microstructures in dermatological practice and is gaining prominence as a crucial tool. Dermoscopy is an evidence-based practice used to enhance the early detection of skin malignancies and to help distinguish between various skin conditions, including pigmented and nonpigmented skin malignancies. Currently, the vast majority of global guidelines for skin cancer recommend dermoscopy as a critical component. Dermoscopy use is increasing worldwide, but to date, no study has documented the attitudes toward and use of dermoscopy among future dermatologists in Saudi Arabia.

Objective: We aimed to determine the proportion of dermatology residents in Riyadh who use dermoscopy in their clinical practice; identify factors influencing the use of dermoscopy, such as availability of equipment, training, and the perceived importance of dermoscopy in clinical practice; explore barriers to dermoscopy use, including the lack of access to necessary resources (eg, dermoscopes) and insufficient training; and provide insights into the adoption and integration of dermoscopy into dermatology training and clinical practice in Saudi Arabia.

Methods: In January 2024, a validated and published questionnaire was modified to meet research requirements and was sent to all registered dermatology residents in the The Saudi Board of Dermatology and Venereology Program.

Results: In total, 63 dermatology residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, completed the web-based questionnaire (response rate=87.5%). The sample was predominantly female (n=34, 54.0%), with the majority (n=53, 84.1%) aged between 26 and 30 years. A notable proportion of participants (n=22, 34.9%) were in their final year of residency. Over half of the participants (n=34, 54.0%) owned a dermoscope, and a substantial number of them (n=23, 36.5%) reported conducting 21-30 clinic consultations per month on average. More than half of the participants (n=36, 57.1%) had received dermoscopy training, and 16 (36.4%) had used dermoscopy for 2 years. Additionally, most participants (n=20, 45.5%) had used nonpolarized immersion-contact dermoscopy, while 19 (43.2%) had used polarized light dermoscopy. Furthermore, the majority (n=22, 50.0%) used dermoscopy in fewer than 10% of cases involving patients with inflammatory skin lesions. Statistical analysis revealed significant associations between the participants’ ages (P=.003), residency levels (P=.001), and practice centers and the use of dermoscopy (P=.004).

Conclusions: Dermoscopy has been widely adopted by dermatology residents in their daily clinical practice due to its benefits in early detection and diagnosis of skin diseases. However, the overall extent of dermoscopy use within the dermatology community remains unclear, highlighting the need for further education. In Saudi Arabia, the key factors influencing dermoscopy use include residents’ ages, residency levels, and practice centers. Younger dermatologists have expressed strong interest in improving their dermoscopy knowledge and skills. Expanding access to dermoscopy equipment and providing training during residency could further promote its use across the country.

JMIR Dermatol 2025;8:e63861

doi:10.2196/63861

Keywords



Dermoscopy is a noninvasive technology used to examine the skin’s invisible microstructures in dermatological practice [1]. It is an established technique for analyzing skin lesions, with its origins tracing back to the 17th century when Kohlhaus used a microscope to study nail matrix vessels [1-3]. However, dermoscopy did not gain widespread use until the 20th century, when Goldman developed a portable microscope capable of magnifying up to 10 times more than the naked eye [1-6]. Historically, dermoscopy has been used to diagnose pigmented lesions such as naevi, melanomas, and pigmented basal cell carcinomas [7].

Since the 1990s, it has been used to diagnose other dermatological disorders, including infections such as scabies, inflammatory lesions, and hair and nail-fold alterations, and it is also used to track lesions’ progress or reactions to topical treatments such as imiquimod or 5-fluorouracil [8-11]. The evidence-based practice associated with dermoscopy use improves the diagnostic accuracy for skin cancer, reduces unnecessary biopsies of benign lesions, increases survival rates, and improves the early identification of skin malignancies [12-14]. A 2002 meta-analysis of 27 studies revealed that dermoscopy increases experienced physicians’ diagnostic accuracy for melanoma compared to unaided inspection [1]. Moreover, it helps distinguish between various kinds of pigmented and nonpigmented skin malignancies in vivo, and it is significant in differentiating between inflammatory and neoplastic lesions. Currently, the vast majority of worldwide guidelines for skin cancer recommend dermoscopy as a critical component of diagnosing and following up with patients facing an increased risk of this disease [15-20]. Dermoscopy is also increasingly accepted as a standard practice worldwide. Multiple studies have revealed that US dermatologists use dermoscopy. Indeed, 1555 out of 3238 (48%) American dermatologists surveyed in 2010 said they used dermoscopy [21]. Chamberlain’s study of dermoscopy revealed a 98% usage rate use in Australia [22,23], while 95% of dermatologists in France use the practice [24]. However, no study has documented the attitudes toward and use of dermoscopy among future dermatologists in Saudi Arabia. In this study, dermoscopy prevalence among dermatology residents in Riyadh was assessed alongside information sources and elements that influence its use, such as residency levels and the frequency of dermoscopy diagnoses.


Study Design

A cross-sectional study was conducted in Riyadh to determine the attitudes of dermatologists toward the dermoscopy. The convenience sampling technique was used in this study to recruit the study participants. The questionnaire tool was distributed in January 2024 through email registered at the Saudi Commission for Health Specialists.

The inclusion criterion for this study was to be a registered dermatology resident in Saudi boards in Riyadh. Any participants who did not meet this inclusion criterion was excluded from this study.

Questionnaire Tool

This study adapted and used a questionnaire previously tested and found valid and reliable by Forsea et al [25]. The questionnaire comprises 2 sections: the first section collected information related to participants’ demographics (gender, age, and residency level), and in the second section, the future dermatologists who participated were asked about their perspectives about the utility of dermoscopy, their use patterns, their training experiences, and their self-reported confidence in dermoscopy diagnosis.

Ethical Considerations

The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Regional and institutional human medical biological research ethics committee of Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (approval 735/2024). Participation in the study was entirely voluntary, and informed written consent was obtained from all participants before their involvement. The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the declaration of Helsinki. All data collected were anonymized to ensure the privacy and confidentiality of the participants.

Study Analysis

All research data were entered into a Microsoft Excel (version 16.0) spreadsheet. Data analysis was performed using SPSS (version 28; IBM Corp). Descriptive statistics were used in the statistical analysis; relative frequencies (and percentage values) were used to present categorical variables. The chi-square test was used to assess the association between categorical variables and dermoscopy use, with a 2-sided value of P<.05 considered statistically significant.


A total of 63 dermatology residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, completed the web-based questionnaire, yielding an 87.5% response rate. More than half of the participants (n=34, 54.0%) were female, the majority (n=53, 84.1%) were aged between 26 and 30 years, and a considerable proportion (n=22, 34.9%) were in their fourth year of residency (Table 1).

Table 1. Participants’ (N=63) sociodemographic information.
Sociodemographic characteristicsParticipants, n (%)
Gender
Female34 (54.0)
Male29 (46.0)
Age (years)
20‐258 (12.7)
26‐3053 (84.1)
31‐351 (1.6)
36‐401 (1.6)
Residency level
Residency year 19 (14.3)
Residency year 219 (30.2)
Residency year 313 (20.6)
Residency year 422 (34.9)

Table 2 (below) depicts practice characteristics, dermoscopy training, and dermoscopy use patterns among the participating dermatology residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. More than half of the participants (n=34; 54.0%) owned a dermoscope, while a substantial number of them (n=23, 36.5%) offered an average of 21‐30 monthly clinic consultations. Most participants (n=57, 90.5%) presented an average number of 0-5 clinic consultations per month where they saw patients with cancer (all types). More than half of the participants (n=36, 57.1%) had received dermoscopy training. The majority of the participants (n=44, 69.8%) used dermoscopy, and a significant number of them had been inspired to do so by their colleagues (n=12, 27.3%) and mentors (n=9, 20.5%). The reported reasons for not using dermoscopy were its unavailability in an office (n=8, 42.1%) and a lack of training (n=6, 31.6%). Half of the participants (n=22, 50.0%) reported having used dermoscopy pictures in medical education, particularly in conferences, lectures, and academic activities. Most of the participants (n=17, 38.6%) had completed a rotation at King Saud University Medical City in 2023. A considerable proportion of participants (n=16, 36.4%) had used dermoscopy for 2 years; the majority used a nonpolarized immersion-contact dermoscope (n=20, 45.5%) or polarized-light dermoscope (n=19, 43.2%). Regarding their average practice, the majority of participants (n=15, 34.1%) reported using dermoscopy at least once per day. ABCD (Asymmetrical, Border, Color, Diameter) was reported to be the most common algorithm used by the majority of the participating dermatology residents (n=23, 52.3%) for the diagnosis of pigmented lesions.

Table 2. Dermoscopy practice characteristics, training, and use patterns.
Question and categoriesParticipants, n (%)
Do you own a dermoscope?
Yes, I do34 (54.0)
It is provided in the clinic9 (14.3)
No, I do not own one, nor is it provided20 (31.7)
What is your average number of monthly clinic consultations?
0‐1014 (22.2)
11‐2022 (34.9)
21‐3023 (36.5)
31‐402 (3.2)
More than 402 (3.2)
What is the average number of monthly clinic consultations where you see patients with skin cancer (of all types)?
0‐557 (90.5)
6‐103 (4.8)
11‐202 (3.2)
More than 201 (1.6)
Have you received dermoscopy training as part of your dermatology residency?
Yes36 (57.1)
No27 (42.9)
Outside of your residency training, what type of dermoscopy training have you pursued?
Academic activities provided by the residency program21 (33.3)
Dermoscopy course5 (7.9)
Web-based dermoscopy course14 (22.2)
Attended conferences or congresses3 (4.8)
Books or atlases3 (4.8)
A mentor or tutor4 (6.3)
No training13 (20.6)
Do you use dermoscopy?
Yes44 (69.8)
No19 (30.2)
Which of the following made you consider using dermoscopy?
A colleague12 (27.3)
A mentor9 (20.5)
Conference lectures6 (13.6)
Evidence-based practice4 (9.1)
Lectures provided by dermatology Saudi boards residency program3 (6.8)
A paid workshop2 (4.5)
Other8 (18.2)
If you do not use dermoscopy, please give the reason why not.
A dermoscope is not available in my office8 (42.1)
I have not been trained in dermoscopy6 (31.6)
Other5 (26.3)
Have you used dermoscopy pictures in medical education?
No, I have not used them18 (40.9)
Yes, in conferences, lectures, academic activities, etc22 (50.0)
Yes, in publications in articles or journals4 (9.1)
Other20 (31.7)
In the last year, where was your rotation?
King Faisal Specialist Hospital10 (22.7)
King Saud University Medical City17 (38.6)
Ministry of National Guard Hospital12 (27.3)
Prince Sultan Military Medical City5 (11.4)
For how long have you been using dermoscopy?
1 years13 (29.5)
2 years16 (36.4)
3 years12 (27.3)
4 years3 (6.8)
What type of dermoscope do you use?
Nonpolarized immersion-contact dermoscope (contact with the skin and an interface liquid, eg, oil or alcohol)20 (45.5)
Polarized-light dermoscope19 (43.2)
Dermoscope with a digital camera2 (4.5)
Digital video dermoscopy system (eg, Fotofinder or Molemax)3 (6.8)
In your average practice, how often do you use dermoscopy?
Less than once per month5 (11.4)
1‐4 times per month13 (29.5)
More than once per week11 (25.0)
At least once per day15 (34.1)
Which particular algorithm for the dermoscopic diagnosis of pigmented lesions do you regularly use?
ABCDa rule23 (52.3)
I do not systematically use any particular algorithm10 (22.7)
Menzies’s algorithm1 (2.3)
Pattern analysis7 (15.9)
Seven-point checklist3 (6.8)

aABCD: Asymmetrical, Border, Color, Diameter.

Table 3 illustrates clinical practices and the confidence in dermoscopy skills among the participating dermatology residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Our findings revealed that the majority of the participants (n=22, 50.0%) used dermoscopy in fewer than 10% of cases involving patients with inflammatory skin lesions. Moreover, a substantial proportion of participants (n=15,34.0%) used dermoscopy in more than 70% of cases involving the examination of pigmented skin tumors. Eleven (25.0%) participants used dermoscopy for <10% of their patients who were examined for nonpigmented skin tumors. Regarding the participants’ dermoscopy skills, the majority of them were somewhat confident in the assessment of nonpigmented skin tumors (n=26, 59.1%), inflammatory skin lesions (n=22, 50.0%), and pigmented skin tumors (n=19, 43.2%).

Table 3. Clinical dermoscopy practices and confidence in dermoscopy skills.
CategoryPigmented skin tumors, n (%)Nonpigmented skin tumors, n (%)Inflammatory skin lesions, n (%)
When examining patients with the following disorders, in what percentage of cases do you use dermoscopy?
<10% of cases9 (20.5)11 (25.0)22 (50.0)
11%‐30% of cases8 (18.2)8 (18.2)10 (22.7)
31%‐50% of cases4 (9.1)6 (13.6)5 (11.4)
51%‐70% of cases8 (18.2)10 (22.7)3 (6.8)
>70% of cases15 (34.0)9 (20.5)2 (4.5)
How confident are you in your dermoscopy skills for the assessment of the following types of lesions?
Not confident12 (27.3)8 (18.2)11 (25.0)
Somewhat confident19 (43.2)26 (59.1)22 (50.0)
Confident13 (29.5)10 (22.7)11 (25.0)

Table 4 illustrates the usefulness, advantages, and performance of dermoscopy. The vast majority of the participants (n=41, 93.2%) reported that dermoscopy was useful in diagnosing melanoma and following up on melanocytic lesions (n=39, 88.6%), diagnosing pigmented skin tumors (n=35, 79.5%), and diagnosing nonpigmented skin tumors (n=31, 70.5%). Regarding advantages, the majority of the participants agreed that dermoscopy use increases confidence in their clinical diagnoses (n=30, 68.2%), reduces unnecessary biopsies or excisions (n=27, 61.4%), and improves record-keeping (n=25, 56.8%). Weighing in on performance, more than half of the participants (n=30, 68.2%) reported that dermoscopy use increases the number of melanomas detected compared to naked-eye examinations. Additionally, the majority of participants (n=27, 61.4%) noted that the use of dermoscopy reduces the excision of benign lesions.

Table 4. Usefulness, advantages, and performance of dermoscopy use.
CategoryParticipants, n (%)
Usefulness of dermoscopy
Diagnosis of melanoma
Not useful1 (2.3)
Somewhat useful2 (4.5)
Useful41 (93.2)
Follow-up on melanocytic lesions
Not useful0 (0)
Somewhat useful5 (11.4)
Useful39 (88.6)
Diagnosis of pigmented skin tumors
Not useful0 (0)
Somewhat useful9 (20.5)
Useful35 (79.5)
Diagnosis of nonpigmented skin tumors
Not useful1 (2.3)
Somewhat useful12 (27.3)
Useful31 (70.5)
Diagnosis of inflammatory skin lesions
Not useful3 (6.8)
Somewhat useful19 (43.2)
Useful22 (50.0)
Follow-up on nonmelanocytic skin lesions
Not useful3 (6.8)
Somewhat useful19 (43.2)
Useful22 (50.0)
Advantages of using dermoscopy
Diagnoses melanoma in early stages
Strongly agree22 (50.0)
Agree19 (43.2)
Neither agree nor disagree3 (6.8)
Disagree0 (0)
Allows the monitoring of lesions
Strongly agree22 (50.0)
Agree19 (43.2)
Neither agree nor disagree3 (6.8)
Disagree0 (0)
Reduces the number of unnecessary biopsies or excisions
Strongly agree27 (61.4)
Agree14 (31.8)
Neither agree nor disagree3 (6.8)
Disagree0 (0)
Increases confidence in my clinical diagnoses
Strongly agree30 (68.2)
Agree13 (29.5)
Neither agree nor disagree1 (2.3)
Disagree0 (0)
Improves record-keeping
Strongly agree25 (56.8)
Agree14 (31.8)
Neither agree nor disagree4 (9.1)
Disagree1 (2.3)
Reduces patients’ anxiety
Strongly agree22 (50.0)
Agree12 (27.3)
Neither agree nor disagree10 (22.7)
Disagree0 (0)
Improves documentation for medical liabilities
Strongly agree25 (56.8)
Agree12 (27.3)
Neither agree nor disagree6 (13.6)
Disagree1 (2.3)
Increases reimbursement
Strongly agree21 (47.7)
Agree12 (27.3)
Neither agree nor disagree11 (25.0)
Disagree0 (0)
Dermoscopy performance
Dermoscopy has increased the number of melanomas detected compared to naked-eye examinations
Yes30 (68.2)
No14 (31.8)
In your practice, how did the use of dermoscopy influence the number of excisions of benign lesions that you performed?
Decreased the number27 (61.4)
Increased the number6 (13.6)
Did not change the number11 (25.0)

Table 5 presents the relationship between categorical variables and the use of dermoscopy, as well as dermatologists’ training. The results established a significant association of the participants’ ages (P=.003), residency levels (P=.001), and practice centers (P=.004) with the use of dermoscopy among the participants. Additionally, this study established a significant association between receiving dermoscopy training and confidence levels among participating dermatology residents (P=.002). Furthermore, a significant association between the type of training and the type of dermoscopy use was found (P=.003).

Table 5. The association between categorical variables and dermoscopy use—association between participants’ categorical variables and the use of dermoscopy, use frequency, and training type.
VariablesParticipants, n (%)P value
Gender.36
Female22 (50.0)
Male22 (50.0)
Age (years).003
20‐253 (6.8)
26‐3039 (88.6)
31‐351 (2.3)
36‐401 (2.3)
Residency level.001
Residency year 12 (4.5)
Residency year 211 (25.0)
Residency year 39 (20.5)
Residency year 422 (50.0)
Device availability and cost.12
Yes, I own such a device34 (77.3)
It is provided in the clinic8 (18.2)
No, I do not own it, nor is it provided2 (4.5)
Practice centera
King Saud University Medical City11 (25.0)
Other33 (75.0)
Number of skin clinics and patients.45
Less than once per month5 (11.4)
1‐4 times per month13 (29.5)
More than once per week11 (25.0)
At least once per day15 (34.1)
Type of training.43
Dermoscopy training14 (31.8)
Other30 (68.2)
Change in excisions of benign lesions.22
Yes21 (44.7)
No23 (52.3)
Receiving dermoscopy training.43
Yes14 (31.8)
No30 (68.2)
Receiving dermoscopy training
Owning a dermoscope.13
Yes, I own one34 (77.3)
It is provided in the clinic8 (18.2)
No, I do not own one, nor is one provided2 (4.5)
Degree of confidence.002
Yes36 (81.8)
No8 (18.2)
Type of usage.46
Benign lesion24 (54.5)
Pigment skin tumors20 (45.5)
Dermoscopy use frequency
Lesion type.58
Pigmented skin tumors9 (20.5)
Nonpigmented skin tumors13 (29.5)
Inflammatory skin lesions22 (50.0)
Type of training
Usage type.003
Dermoscope with a digital camera2 (4.5)
Nonpolarized immersion-contact dermoscope23 (52.3)
Polarized-light dermoscope19 (43.2)
Inflammatory skin lesion.57
Yes22 (50.0)
No22 (50.0)

aNot applicable.


Principal Findings

This study aimed to assess the prevalence of dermoscopy use among dermatology residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and the need for dermoscopy training, as well as the practice’s benefits in diagnosing and treating skin diseases. The study’s sample was predominantly female. Moreover, a substantial majority of the participants were in their fourth year of residency and most of them were aged between 26 and 30 years.

This study revealed that more than half of the surveyed dermatology residents owned a dermoscope, with a considerable majority seeing a significant number of patients with cancers of all types every month. Additionally, more than half of the participants had received dermoscopy training, and a considerable proportion were pursuing academic activities provided by the residency program outside of their specialized training. The study’s findings underscore the importance of dermoscopy use and the necessity of better dermoscopy training as an invaluable tool in the earlier recognition of different dermatological diseases [25], as well as future strategic planning and enhanced dermoscopy training and practice in Saudi Arabia [26]. Our study verified that most of the participating dermatology residents used dermoscopy to manage their patients’ conditions, and they had received training on its use. A considerable proportion of the participants had used dermoscopy for 2 years, and the majority used nonpolarized immersion-contact and polarized-light dermoscopes.

These findings are consistent with those of a study conducted by Freeman et al [27] in the United States, which revealed that dermatologists apply dermoscopy in their daily routines to manage patients’ conditions and to diagnose their patients [27]. Similarly, a study conducted by Jones et al [28] on dermoscopy use as part of primary care in the United Kingdom found that dermatologists used dermoscopy to manage their patients’ conditions daily at a rate of 98.5% [28]. This study revealed that the majority of respondents used dermoscopy, with many being inspired to do so by their colleagues and mentors. However, some participants did not use dermoscopy due to the unavailability of dermoscopes in their offices and insufficient training. These findings align with those of a study by Alqahtani and AlBukhari [29] in Saudi Arabia, which identified a lack of adequate education and training among residents as a key reason for dermatologists’ reluctance to use dermoscopy. Similarly, our findings are consistent with those of a study conducted by Engasser and Warshaw [21] in the United States, which identified financial costs and lack of training as the primary reasons why dermatologists avoid using dermoscopy [30].

This study’s findings revealed that the majority of the participating dermatology residents used dermoscopy in fewer than 10% of cases involving patients with inflammatory skin lesions, in >70% of cases involving the examination of patients for pigmented skin tumors, and in <10% of cases in which patients were examined for nonpigmented skin tumors. Additionally, the majority of the participants reported that dermoscopy was useful in diagnosing melanoma, following up on melanocytic lesions, diagnosing pigmented skin tumors, and diagnosing nonpigmented skin tumors. These findings align with those of the study by Kuo et al [30], which involved dermatologists in Taiwan and noted that clinicians used dermoscopy to examine pigmented and nonpigmented lesions. This study found that the use of dermoscopy was associated with dermatologists’ increased confidence in their clinical diagnosis, that it reduced unnecessary biopsies or excisions, and that it improved record-keeping. Furthermore, the study revealed that dermoscopy use increased the number of melanomas detected compared to naked-eye examinations while also reducing the excisions of benign lesions.

This study’s demographics revealed that most of the participants were female. This preponderance can be explained by the higher proportion of female dermatologists worldwide [21,27]. In terms of age, majority of participating dermatology residents were between 26 and 30 years old. This suggests that younger dermatologists in Saudi Arabia are using dermoscopy more frequently than their older counterparts. These findings are consistent with those of a study conducted by Blum et al [31] in Germany, which reported higher dermoscopy usage rates among individuals younger than 35 years. This highlights the growing role of dermoscopy in clinical practice and the younger generation’s willingness to embrace new technologies for diagnosing and treating skin diseases.

Limitations

Our results may be subject to several limitations. Despite the high response rate (87.5%), participants who chose to respond may have differed in their attitudes, experiences, or usage of dermoscopy compared to nonrespondents. As a cross-sectional study, it is limited by its inability to assess causal relationships. The sample size was relatively small, which could have increased the risk of sampling bias. Additionally, since the study was conducted in only one region, that is, Riyadh, its findings may not be generalizable to the entire country of Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, because the study involved an web-based questionnaire, it relied on respondents accurately documenting their responses, without the ability to verify their accuracy, which may have introduced bias.

Conclusion

Dermoscopy has been widely adopted, with more than half of the dermatology residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, using this technology. Its use is increasing among dermatology residents due to its evidence-based advantages in the early detection and diagnosis of skin diseases. The participants’ ages, residency levels, and practice centers were identified as the main factors influencing dermoscopy use in Saudi Arabia. The study also highlighted a strong willingness among young dermatologists to improve their dermoscopy knowledge and skills. Based on these findings, the study recommends that policy makers prioritize funding for dermoscopy by increasing the number of dermoscopes, as well as focusing on capacity building and training for dermatology residents.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

  1. Wu X, Marchetti MA, Marghoob AA. Dermoscopy: not just for dermatologists. Melanoma Manag. Feb 2015;2(1):63-73. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  2. Marghoob AA, Swindle LD, Moricz CZM, et al. Instruments and new technologies for the in vivo diagnosis of melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. Nov 2003;49(5):777-797. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  3. Menzies SW, Ingvar C, McCarthy WH. A sensitivity and specificity analysis of the surface microscopy features of invasive melanoma. Melanoma Res. Feb 1996;6(1):55-62. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  4. Argenziano G, Soyer HP. Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions--a valuable tool for early diagnosis of melanoma. Lancet Oncol. Jul 2001;2(7):443-449. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  5. Campos-do-Carmo G, Ramos-e-Silva M. Dermoscopy: basic concepts. Int J Dermatol. Jul 2008;47(7):712-719. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  6. Buch J, Criton S. Dermoscopy saga - a tale of 5 centuries. Indian J Dermatol. 2021;66(2):174-178. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  7. Pehamberger H, Steiner A, Wolff K. In vivo epiluminescence microscopy of pigmented skin lesions. I. Pattern analysis of pigmented skin lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. Oct 1987;17(4):571-583. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  8. Argenziano G, Fabbrocini G, Delfino M. Epiluminescence microscopy. A new approach to in vivo detection of Sarcoptes scabiei. Arch Dermatol. Jun 1997;133(6):751-753. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  9. Zalaudek I, Lallas A, Moscarella E, Longo C, Soyer HP, Argenziano G. The dermatologist’s stethoscope-traditional and new applications of dermoscopy. Dermatol Pract Concept. Apr 2013;3(2):67-71. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  10. Zalaudek I, Argenziano G, Di Stefani A, et al. Dermoscopy in general dermatology. Dermatology (Basel). 2006;212(1):7-18. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  11. Kaçar N, Sanli B, Zalaudek I, Yildiz N, Ergin S. Dermatoscopy for monitoring treatment of actinic keratosis with imiquimod. Clin Exp Dermatol. Jul 2012;37(5):567-569. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  12. Argenziano G, Cerroni L, Zalaudek I, et al. Accuracy in melanoma detection: a 10-year multicenter survey. J Am Acad Dermatol. Jul 2012;67(1):54-59. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  13. Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, Binder M. Diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy. Lancet Oncol. Mar 2002;3(3):159-165. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  14. Liebman TN, Goulart JM, Soriano R, et al. Effect of dermoscopy education on the ability of medical students to detect skin cancer. Arch Dermatol. Sep 2012;148(9):1016-1022. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  15. Tromme I, Devleesschauwer B, Beutels P, et al. Selective use of sequential digital dermoscopy imaging allows a cost reduction in the melanoma detection process: a belgian study of patients with a single or a small number of atypical nevi. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(10):e109339. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  16. van der Rhee JI, Bergman W, Kukutsch NA. The impact of dermoscopy on the management of pigmented lesions in everyday clinical practice of general dermatologists: a prospective study. Br J Dermatol. Mar 2010;162(3):563-567. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  17. Giacomel J, Zalaudek I, Argenziano G, Lallas A. Dermoscopy of hypertrophic lupus erythematosus and differentiation from squamous cell carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. Jan 2015;72(1 Suppl):S33-S36. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  18. Errichetti E, Stinco G. The practical usefulness of dermoscopy in general dermatology. G Ital Dermatol Venereol. Oct 2015;150(5):533-546. [Medline]
  19. Dummer R, Schadendorf D, Ascierto PA, Larkin J, Lebbé C, Hauschild A. Integrating first-line treatment options into clinical practice: what’s new in advanced melanoma? Melanoma Res. Dec 2015;25(6):461-469. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  20. Watts CG, Dieng M, Morton RL, Mann GJ, Menzies SW, Cust AE. Clinical practice guidelines for identification, screening and follow-up of individuals at high risk of primary cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review. Br J Dermatol. Jan 2015;172(1):33-47. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  21. Engasser HC, Warshaw EM. Dermatoscopy use by US dermatologists: a cross-sectional survey. J Am Acad Dermatol. Sep 2010;63(3):412-419. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  22. Piliouras P, Buettner P, Soyer HP. Dermoscopy use in the next generation: a survey of Australian dermatology trainees. Australas J Dermatol. Feb 2014;55(1):49-52. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  23. Venugopal SS, Soyer HP, Menzies SW. Results of a nationwide dermoscopy survey investigating the prevalence, advantages and disadvantages of dermoscopy use among Australian dermatologists. Australas J Dermatol. Feb 2011;52(1):14-18. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  24. Moulin C, Poulalhon N, Duru G, Debarbieux S, Dalle S, Thomas L. Dermoscopy use by French private practice dermatologists: a nationwide survey. Br J Dermatol. Jan 2013;168(1):74-79. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  25. Forsea AM, Tschandl P, Zalaudek I, et al. The impact of dermoscopy on melanoma detection in the practice of dermatologists in Europe: results of a pan-European survey. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. Jul 2017;31(7):1148-1156. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  26. Chamberlain AJ, Kelly JW. Use of dermoscopy in Australia. Med J Aust. Aug 20, 2007;187(4):252-253. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  27. Freeman SR, Greene RE, Kimball AB, et al. US dermatology residents’ satisfaction with training and mentoring: survey results from the 2005 and 2006 Las Vegas Dermatology Seminars. Arch Dermatol. Jul 2008;144(7):896-900. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  28. Jones OT, Jurascheck LC, Utukuri M, Pannebakker MM, Emery J, Walter FM. Dermoscopy use in UK primary care: a survey of GPs with a special interest in dermatology. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. Sep 2019;33(9):1706-1712. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  29. Alqahtani NN, AlBukhari FA. The use of dermoscopy among dermatologists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study. J Dermatol Dermatol Surg. 2021;25(1):30-32. [CrossRef]
  30. Kuo YW, Chang YJ, Wang SH, et al. Survey of dermoscopy use by Taiwanese dermatologists. Dermatol Sinica. Dec 2015;33(4):215-219. [CrossRef]
  31. Blum A, Kreusch J, Stolz W, et al. The status of dermoscopy in Germany - results of the cross-sectional Pan-Euro-Dermoscopy Study. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. Feb 2018;16(2):174-181. [CrossRef] [Medline]


ABCD: Asymmetrical, Border, Color, Diameter


Edited by Alexandria Kristensen-Cabrera; submitted 01.07.24; peer-reviewed by Georgia Pappa, Mohammed Abu El-Hamd; final revised version received 12.12.24; accepted 16.12.24; published 23.01.25.

Copyright

© Abdullah Almeziny, Rahaf Almutairi, Amal Altamimi, Khloud Alshehri, Latifah Almehaideb, Asem Shadid, Mohammed Al Mashali. Originally published in JMIR Dermatology (http://derma.jmir.org), 23.1.2025.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Dermatology, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://derma.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.