OBJECTIVE: To assess interrater reliability in the diagnosis of @entity320 in @entity1 . DESIGN, SETTING, AND @entity1 : We collected 85 slides of @entity320 diagnosed in @entity1 younger than 17 years through a network of dermatopathologists and dermatologists. The slides were classified into 3 categories: (1) slides from @entity1 with metastatic @entity320 ; (2) slides from disease-free @entity1 with a follow-up of less than 5 years; (3) slides from disease-free @entity1 with a follow-up of 5 years or longer. Category 1 was considered the gold standard. Four pairs of expert dermatopathologists reviewed the slides and classified them into @entity320 , @entity7174 (including @entity27897 ), or @entity5 . INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Concordance between pairs of experts. RESULTS: For category 1 slides (n = 20), the concordance was weak to moderate. For category 2 slides (n = 47), the concordance was weak. For category 3 slides (n = 18), the concordance was poor to moderate. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the reliability of diagnosis of @entity320 in childhood is poor, even when submitted to experts.

Reliability of the histopathologic diagnosis of XXXX in childhood.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['children', 'patients', 'PARTICIPANTS'] @entity5 :: ('MESH:D009369', 'Disease') :: ['ambiguous tumors'] @entity7174 :: ('MESH:D009506', 'Disease') :: ['nevus'] @entity27897 :: ('MESH:D018332', 'Disease') :: ['Spitz nevus'] @entity320 :: ('MESH:D008545', 'Disease') :: ['melanoma', 'melanomas', 'malignant melanoma']
@entity320 :: (MESH:D008545,Disease) :: ['malignant melanoma']
