Background Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and reproductive tract infections (RTIs) pose significant public health challenges globally, particularly in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to investigate the challenges faced by healthcare providers in managing and preventing STIs/RTIs in India. Materials and methods In-depth interviews were conducted with eight healthcare providers, including counselors, gynecologists, and dermatologists, working in government settings. A semi-structured interview guide was used to explore challenges related to patient care and healthcare system resources. Results The study revealed significant gaps in patient knowledge and awareness about STIs/RTIs, with misconceptions affecting treatment-seeking behavior. Social stigma and cultural barriers were identified as major obstacles to open communication and timely care. Gender-specific challenges in healthcare-seeking behavior and partner notification were noted. Healthcare providers reported inconsistent availability of treatment kits and medications, as well as challenges in ensuring patient compliance. The need for improved healthcare infrastructure, including specialized clinics and better interdepartmental coordination, was highlighted. Conclusion Addressing STI/RTI management challenges requires a multifaceted approach, including enhancing public awareness, ensuring consistent medication supply, establishing specialized clinics, and improving interdepartmental coordination. These findings provide valuable insights for developing targeted interventions to improve STI/RTI management and prevention in resource-limited settings.

Patients\' experience accessing dermatologic care is understudied. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to examine current wait times for new patients to receive dermatological care in NYC. Websites at 58 accredited private and public hospitals in the five boroughs of NYC were reviewed to identify dermatology practices. Office telephone numbers listed on each website were called to collect information pertaining to whether the physician was accepting new patients, type of insurance accepted (public, private, both, or none), and the number of days until a new patient could be seen for an appointment. Data pertaining to the time kept on hold and availability of web-based booking were also collected. Mean waiting time for an appointment was 50 days [standard deviation, SD 66] - nearly 2 months, but the distribution was considerably skewed. The median waiting time was 19.5 days [Interquartile range, IQR 4-60]. The time kept on hold to make the appointment was negligible at about 1 min (63 s, SD = 77) but could take up to ~ 7 min. Two-thirds of dermatologists accepted private, Medicare, and Medicaid insurance (n = 228, 66%); a small number accepted only private insurance (n = 12, 4%) or no insurance at all (n = 16, 5%). The median waiting time for an appointment for the 228 providers that accepted Medicaid was 30.5 days (IQR = 5.0-73.25) while for providers who did not accept Medicaid (n = 116) the median wait time for an appointment was 13.0 days (IQR = 3.0-38.0). Just over half (56%) of the dermatologists allowed for appointments to be booked on their website (n = 193). This research highlights the necessity of incorporating new strategies into routine dermatology appointments in order to increase treatment availability and decrease healthcare inequality.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes are relevant in clinical practice showing patient benefits, supporting clinicians\' decision-making, and contributing to the delivery of high standards of care. Digital monitoring of patient-reported outcomes is still rare. The Patient Benefit Index (PBI) measures benefits and goals from patients\' views and may be relevant for regular documentation and shared decision-making.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop electronic versions of the PBI to examine their feasibility and acceptability in clinical practice for patients with psoriasis.
METHODS: We developed an app and a web version of the existing, valid PBI using focus groups and cognitive debriefings with patients before conducting a quantitative survey on its feasibility and acceptability. Conduction took part in an outpatient dermatology care unit in Germany. Descriptive and subgroup analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: A total of 139 patients completed the electronic PBIs (ePBIs) and took part in the survey. The ePBI was understandable (n=129-137, 92.8%-98.6%) and feasible, for example, easy to read (n=135, 97.1%) and simple to handle (n=137, 98.5%). Acceptability was also high, for example, patients can imagine using and discussing the ePBI data in practice (n=91, 65.5%) and documenting it regularly (n=88, 63.3%). They believe it could support treatment decisions (n=118, 84.9%) and improve communication with their physician (n=112, 81.3%). They can imagine filling in electronic questionnaires regularly (n=118, 84.9%), even preferring electronic over paper versions (n=113, 81.2%). Older and less educated people show less feasibility, but the latter expected the relationship with their physician to improve and would be more willing to invest time or effort.
CONCLUSIONS: The app and web version of the PBI are usable and acceptable for patients offering comprehensive documentation and patient participation in practice. An implementation strategy should consider patients\' needs, barriers, and facilitators but also physicians\' attitudes and requirements from the health care system.

BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) have shown potential in medical fields, including dermatology. With the introduction of image analysis capabilities in LLMs, their application in dermatological diagnostics has garnered significant interest. These capabilities are enabled by the integration of computer vision techniques into the underlying architecture of LLMs.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of Claude 3 Opus and ChatGPT with GPT-4 in analyzing dermoscopic images for melanoma detection, providing insights into their strengths and limitations.
METHODS: We randomly selected 100 histopathology-confirmed dermoscopic images (50 malignant, 50 benign) from the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC) archive using a computer-generated randomization process. The ISIC archive was chosen due to its comprehensive and well-annotated collection of dermoscopic images, ensuring a diverse and representative sample. Images were included if they were dermoscopic images of melanocytic lesions with histopathologically confirmed diagnoses. Each model was given the same prompt, instructing it to provide the top 3 differential diagnoses for each image, ranked by likelihood. Primary diagnosis accuracy, accuracy of the top 3 differential diagnoses, and malignancy discrimination ability were assessed. The McNemar test was chosen to compare the diagnostic performance of the 2 models, as it is suitable for analyzing paired nominal data.
RESULTS: In the primary diagnosis, Claude 3 Opus achieved 54.9% sensitivity (95% CI 44.08%-65.37%), 57.14% specificity (95% CI 46.31%-67.46%), and 56% accuracy (95% CI 46.22%-65.42%), while ChatGPT demonstrated 56.86% sensitivity (95% CI 45.99%-67.21%), 38.78% specificity (95% CI 28.77%-49.59%), and 48% accuracy (95% CI 38.37%-57.75%). The McNemar test showed no significant difference between the 2 models (P=.17). For the top 3 differential diagnoses, Claude 3 Opus and ChatGPT included the correct diagnosis in 76% (95% CI 66.33%-83.77%) and 78% (95% CI 68.46%-85.45%) of cases, respectively. The McNemar test showed no significant difference (P=.56). In malignancy discrimination, Claude 3 Opus outperformed ChatGPT with 47.06% sensitivity, 81.63% specificity, and 64% accuracy, compared to 45.1%, 42.86%, and 44%, respectively. The McNemar test showed a significant difference (P<.001). Claude 3 Opus had an odds ratio of 3.951 (95% CI 1.685-9.263) in discriminating malignancy, while ChatGPT-4 had an odds ratio of 0.616 (95% CI 0.297-1.278).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the potential of LLMs in assisting dermatologists but also reveals their limitations. Both models made errors in diagnosing melanoma and benign lesions. These findings underscore the need for developing robust, transparent, and clinically validated AI models through collaborative efforts between AI researchers, dermatologists, and other health care professionals. While AI can provide valuable insights, it cannot yet replace the expertise of trained clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Despite the global upscale of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, persistent barriers, such as the poor anamnesis and photo quality, hinder its effective use in practice. Understanding Dutch dermatologists\' experiences and satisfaction with using the teledermatology system in the Dutch health care system is needed. A holistic evaluation may provide valuable insight to understand how barriers interrelate which is deemed necessary for the innovation of teledermatology in practice.
OBJECTIVE: Guided by a complex adaptive system perspective, this study aims to understand Dutch dermatologists\' experience and satisfaction with their training, support communication, interaction, and usage of a teledermatology platform of a Dutch digital hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic, uncovering insights to improve teledermatology services for the future.
METHODS: A web-based questionnaire was sent in December 2021 to Dutch dermatologists who (1) had an active teledermatology platform account, and (2) responded to a teledermatology consultation between October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2021. The questionnaire consisted of the validated Store-and-Forward Telemedicine Service User-satisfaction Questionnaire (SAF-TSUQ) questionnaire, and new questions regarding; demographics of teledermatologists, the use of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, the performance of teledermatology by general practitioners (GP), and the role of dermatologists in the teledermatology process. The open-ended questions were analyzed by a grounded theory approach guided by a sociotechnical model and complemented by a complex adaptive system perspective. A panel discussion with 3 dermatologists was performed to provide additional insight into the responses to the questionnaire.
RESULTS: We obtained responses from 25 out of the 249 (10%) invited dermatologists. Overall, dermatologists had a positive experience with teledermatology. Interestingly, teledermatology use frequency remained unaffected by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the insufficient quality and incompleteness of the clinical content (photos and anamneses information) of the teledermatology consultation impacted the efficiency of the teledermatology workflow. Dermatologists expressed the need for improvement to avoid time-consuming processes or physical referrals. The panel discussion enriched and confirmed the responses, suggesting solutions like mandatory fields for the GPs for a complete anamnesis.
CONCLUSIONS: Dutch Dermatologists view teledermatology as a valuable tool to provide access to dermatology care. However, improvements regarding the quality and completeness of the provided clinical content are necessary for the effectiveness and efficiency of the complex teledermatology system in Dutch health care. This could increase both the dermatologists\' satisfaction and the quality of teledermatology services. Managing trade-offs, such as time investments versus image quality, is crucial for teledermatology implementation and should be assessed from a complexity perspective to understand trade-offs and prevent unintended consequences.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear how patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) and clinicians perceive the level of patient-clinician communication and if there could be potential lapses. This cross-sectional study aims to compare perspectives between patients with AD and dermatologists regarding communication and treatment expectations in Asia.
METHODS: Moderate-to-severe patients with AD and practicing dermatologists were recruited from eight Asia-Pacific territories, including Mainland China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. Patients and dermatologists completed separate surveys designed to elicit their expectations regarding AD management, and their perceived level of patient-clinician communication. Patients were also asked about their treatment satisfaction and whether they prefer additional treatment beyond what was prescribed. Demographic information and responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The study was reviewed by the institutional review board in each territory, and all participants provided informed consent.
RESULTS: A total of 1103 patients and 271 dermatologists completed the surveys. Both patients and dermatologists were largely aligned in their top treatment goals in AD management. However, greater proportions of patients prioritized the prevention of exacerbation (78.0% versus 47.2%), minimization of treatment adverse effects (46.4% versus 9.1%), and improvement in mental health (16.0% versus 4.9%), compared with dermatologists. Although patient-clinician communication was observed to be generally good, 10.9% of patients reported dissatisfaction with communication in AD management. The majority of patients were either \"very satisfied\" or \"satisfied\" with their latest acute AD treatment, but 65.5% of patients still desired additional treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: This multinational study has provided insights on the perspectives of Asian patients and dermatologists in treatment goals, AD management, and communication. In general, both patients and dermatologists were aligned in treatment goals and there was satisfactory patient-clinician communication in most aspects. However, potential areas of improvement have been identified to further enhance patient-centered care.

BACKGROUND: Equitable health manpower distribution is essential for the successful implementation of the Universal Health Care (UHC) program by the Philippine Department of Health. Mapping the distribution and profile of dermatologists in the Philippines can improve Filipinos\' access to skin disease treatment.
METHODS: A review of the database of dermatologists from the Philippine Dermatological Society (PDS) members\' directory (as of November 2023), as well as the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) database (as of July 2023), was conducted. The distribution of PDS-accredited dermatologists was analyzed by geographic location, demographic profile (age and sex), density (per 100,000 people), and the dermatologist-to-general practitioner (GP) ratio. Heatmaps illustrating the distribution of dermatologists in the Philippines and the ratio of PhilHealth-accredited PDS board-certified dermatologists to GPs were created.
RESULTS: Out of 1389 PDS board-certified dermatologists, 1345 resided in the Philippines. The majority were women (1221/1345, 90.78%), with a median age of 47 years (range: 23 to 85). More than half were practicing in the National Capital Region (NCR) (684/1345, 50.86%). The overall dermatologist density was approximately 1 per 100,000 people (1.19); it was highest for the Luzon Island group (1.54) (NCR, 4.80) and lowest for the Mindanao Island group (0.27; the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao or BARMM, 0.04). Less than one-third (396/1345, 29.44%) of dermatologists were PhilHealth-accredited, with a density of 0.35 dermatologists per 100,000 people. Out of 45218 PhilHealth-accredited physicians, 396 (0.88%) were dermatologists while 11748 (25.98%) were GPs. The overall dermatologist-to-GP ratio among PhilHealth-accredited physicians was 1:30; it was highest in the Luzon Island group (1:20) and lowest in the Mindanao Island group (1:118).
CONCLUSIONS: The Philippines lacks dermatologists in regions outside the NCR. The majority are women, and few are PhilHealth-accredited. The dermatologist-to-GP ratio among PhilHealth-accredited physicians is low. Dermatology training programs should encourage more applicants, especially men, and prioritize applicants from underserved regions.

UNASSIGNED: Shared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative process involving both healthcare providers and patients in making medical decisions, which gains increasing prominence in healthcare practice. But evidence on the level of SDM in medical practice and barriers as well as stimulus during the SDM implementation among aesthetic dermatologists is limited in China.
UNASSIGNED: From July to August 2023, 1938 dermatologists were recruited online in China. Data were collected through an electronic questionnaire covering: (1) demographic features; (2) SDM questionnaire physician version (SDM-Q-Doc); and (3) stimulus and barriers in SDM implementation. Logistic regression was applied to explore factors associated with SDM practice, barriers, and stimulus of SDM implementation, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: The 1938 dermatologists included 1329 females (68.6%), with an average age of 35 years. The total SDM score ranged from 0 to 45, with a median value of 40 (IQR: 35-44), and the median stimulus score and barriers scores were 28 (IQR: 24-32) and 19 (IQR: 13-26), respectively. The prevalence of good SDM was 27.2%, logistic regression indicated that female dermatologists (odds ratio, OR=1.21, 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.96-1.51), and dermatologists with more years of aesthetic practice had a higher proportion of good SDM practice (OR was 1.44 for 5-9 years, 1.58 for 10-15 years and 1.77 for over 15 years). Moreover, female dermatologists and dermatologists with higher education level and serviced in private settings had lower barrier scores; female dermatologists and dermatologists with more years of aesthetic practice had higher stimulus scores.
UNASSIGNED: Chinese aesthetic dermatologists appear to implement SDM at an active level, with more stimulus and less barriers in SDM implementation. The integration of SDM into clinical practice among dermatologists is beneficial both for patients and dermatologists. Moreover, SDM practice should be strongly promoted and enhanced during medical aesthetics, especially among male dermatologists, dermatologists with less working experience, and those who work at public institutions.

BACKGROUND: Dermatologic patient education materials (PEMs) are often written above the national average seventh- to eighth-grade reading level. ChatGPT-3.5, GPT-4, DermGPT, and DocsGPT are large language models (LLMs) that are responsive to user prompts. Our project assesses their use in generating dermatologic PEMs at specified reading levels.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the ability of select LLMs to generate PEMs for common and rare dermatologic conditions at unspecified and specified reading levels. Further, the study aims to assess the preservation of meaning across such LLM-generated PEMs, as assessed by dermatology resident trainees.
METHODS: The Flesch-Kincaid reading level (FKRL) of current American Academy of Dermatology PEMs was evaluated for 4 common (atopic dermatitis, acne vulgaris, psoriasis, and herpes zoster) and 4 rare (epidermolysis bullosa, bullous pemphigoid, lamellar ichthyosis, and lichen planus) dermatologic conditions. We prompted ChatGPT-3.5, GPT-4, DermGPT, and DocsGPT to \"Create a patient education handout about [condition] at a [FKRL]\" to iteratively generate 10 PEMs per condition at unspecified fifth- and seventh-grade FKRLs, evaluated with Microsoft Word readability statistics. The preservation of meaning across LLMs was assessed by 2 dermatology resident trainees.
RESULTS: The current American Academy of Dermatology PEMs had an average (SD) FKRL of 9.35 (1.26) and 9.50 (2.3) for common and rare diseases, respectively. For common diseases, the FKRLs of LLM-produced PEMs ranged between 9.8 and 11.21 (unspecified prompt), between 4.22 and 7.43 (fifth-grade prompt), and between 5.98 and 7.28 (seventh-grade prompt). For rare diseases, the FKRLs of LLM-produced PEMs ranged between 9.85 and 11.45 (unspecified prompt), between 4.22 and 7.43 (fifth-grade prompt), and between 5.98 and 7.28 (seventh-grade prompt). At the fifth-grade reading level, GPT-4 was better at producing PEMs for both common and rare conditions than ChatGPT-3.5 (P=.001 and P=.01, respectively), DermGPT (P<.001 and P=.03, respectively), and DocsGPT (P<.001 and P=.02, respectively). At the seventh-grade reading level, no significant difference was found between ChatGPT-3.5, GPT-4, DocsGPT, or DermGPT in producing PEMs for common conditions (all P>.05); however, for rare conditions, ChatGPT-3.5 and DocsGPT outperformed GPT-4 (P=.003 and P<.001, respectively). The preservation of meaning analysis revealed that for common conditions, DermGPT ranked the highest for overall ease of reading, patient understandability, and accuracy (14.75/15, 98%); for rare conditions, handouts generated by GPT-4 ranked the highest (14.5/15, 97%).
CONCLUSIONS: GPT-4 appeared to outperform ChatGPT-3.5, DocsGPT, and DermGPT at the fifth-grade FKRL for both common and rare conditions, although both ChatGPT-3.5 and DocsGPT performed better than GPT-4 at the seventh-grade FKRL for rare conditions. LLM-produced PEMs may reliably meet seventh-grade FKRLs for select common and rare dermatologic conditions and are easy to read, understandable for patients, and mostly accurate. LLMs may play a role in enhancing health literacy and disseminating accessible, understandable PEMs in dermatology.

Lichen planus pigmentosus (LPP) is a condition characterized by persistent and asymptomatic brownish-black-to-blue or purple-gray pigmentation, predominantly in the face and sun-exposed areas, commonly in dark-skinned individuals. Several clinical variants of LPP have been reported. However, the ichthyosiform type of LPP has not been reported. We present a 19-year-old male patient who presented with a 7-year history of asymptomatic grayish macules; patches with fine scales on the face, trunk, and upper extremities; and grayish plaques with thick \"ichthyosiform\" scales on the lower extremities. The diagnosis of LPP was proven by histopathological findings on both the macular and ichthyosiform plaques. Cluster differentiation (CD) 68 stain highlights the same density of pigment-laden macrophages in both the gray macule and the ichthyosiform plaque. The cause of LPP is unknown. Transcription factor anomalies may play a role in increased keratinization of lichen planus lesions. It can be assumed that the mechanism of the altered distribution of keratinization may occur on the ichthyosiform lesions in this patient. The terminology \"ichthyosiform lichen planus pigmentosus\" is hereby proposed to be added to the clinical variants of LPP.