↓ Skip to main content

Development and External Validation of a Melanoma Risk Prediction Model Based on Self-assessed Risk Factors

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Dermatology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
39 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development and External Validation of a Melanoma Risk Prediction Model Based on Self-assessed Risk Factors
Published in
JAMA Dermatology, August 2016
DOI 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.0939
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kylie Vuong, Bruce K. Armstrong, Elisabete Weiderpass, Eiliv Lund, Hans-Olov Adami, Marit B. Veierod, Jennifer H. Barrett, John R. Davies, D. Timothy Bishop, David C. Whiteman, Catherine M. Olsen, John L. Hopper, Graham J. Mann, Anne E. Cust, Kevin McGeechan

Abstract

Identifying individuals at high risk of melanoma can optimize primary and secondary prevention strategies. To develop and externally validate a risk prediction model for incident first-primary cutaneous melanoma using self-assessed risk factors. We used unconditional logistic regression to develop a multivariable risk prediction model. Relative risk estimates from the model were combined with Australian melanoma incidence and competing mortality rates to obtain absolute risk estimates. A risk prediction model was developed using the Australian Melanoma Family Study (629 cases and 535 controls) and externally validated using 4 independent population-based studies: the Western Australia Melanoma Study (511 case-control pairs), Leeds Melanoma Case-Control Study (960 cases and 513 controls), Epigene-QSkin Study (44 544, of which 766 with melanoma), and Swedish Women's Lifestyle and Health Cohort Study (49 259 women, of which 273 had melanoma). We validated model performance internally and externally by assessing discrimination using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Additionally, using the Swedish Women's Lifestyle and Health Cohort Study, we assessed model calibration and clinical usefulness. The risk prediction model included hair color, nevus density, first-degree family history of melanoma, previous nonmelanoma skin cancer, and lifetime sunbed use. On internal validation, the AUC was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.67-0.73). On external validation, the AUC was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.63-0.69) in the Western Australia Melanoma Study, 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.70) in the Leeds Melanoma Case-Control Study, 0.64 (95% CI, 0.62-0.66) in the Epigene-QSkin Study, and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.60-0.67) in the Swedish Women's Lifestyle and Health Cohort Study. Model calibration showed close agreement between predicted and observed numbers of incident melanomas across all deciles of predicted risk. In the external validation setting, there was higher net benefit when using the risk prediction model to classify individuals as high risk compared with classifying all individuals as high risk. The melanoma risk prediction model performs well and may be useful in prevention interventions reliant on a risk assessment using self-assessed risk factors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 17%
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 10%
Psychology 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 26 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 August 2017.
All research outputs
#1,086,271
of 25,525,181 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Dermatology
#788
of 6,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,825
of 381,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Dermatology
#22
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,525,181 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,521 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 381,372 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.