Medical Advisory & Content Methodology

CheckMole's content is developed using a structured, evidence-based methodology. This page explains how we source, write, verify, and update medical information.

Content development methodology

Every piece of medical content on CheckMole follows a four-stage process:

  1. Literature review. We begin with current clinical practice guidelines from major dermatological societies (AAD, BAD, NICE, DDG, SBD) and review relevant peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, prioritizing systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies.
  2. Evidence synthesis. Clinical findings are translated into patient-accessible language. Statistics are contextualized — we do not present isolated numbers without clinical significance. When evidence is uncertain or evolving, we state that explicitly.
  3. Accuracy verification. Medical claims are cross-referenced against at least two independent authoritative sources. Epidemiological data is verified against cancer registries (NCI SEER, IARC GLOBOCAN, Cancer Research UK). Diagnostic criteria are checked against current WHO/AJCC classification standards.
  4. Ongoing review. Published content is reviewed when new clinical guidelines are released, when significant studies change established consensus, or when user feedback identifies areas needing clarification.

Clinical sources we rely on

Dermatological society guidelines

  • American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) — clinical practice guidelines, skin cancer screening recommendations
  • British Association of Dermatologists (BAD) — patient information leaflets, clinical standards
  • Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG) — S3 guidelines for melanoma and NMSC
  • Sociedade Brasileira de Dermatologia (SBD) — skin cancer prevention campaigns, Fitzpatrick guidance
  • European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) — consensus statements

Epidemiological & cancer data

  • National Cancer Institute SEER Program — US cancer statistics, survival rates, staging data
  • International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC/WHO) — GLOBOCAN, UV radiation classification
  • Cancer Research UK — UK incidence and mortality data, trends analysis
  • AJCC Cancer Staging Manual (8th ed.) — melanoma staging criteria (Breslow depth, TNM)

Peer-reviewed literature

  • Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology (JAAD)
  • British Journal of Dermatology (BJD)
  • JAMA Dermatology
  • The Lancet Oncology — melanoma treatment, immunotherapy data
  • New England Journal of Medicine — checkpoint inhibitor trials, staging studies

Screening tool methodology

ABCDE Checker. Based on the ABCDE rule (Asymmetry, Border, Color, Diameter, Evolution), the standard clinical screening method recommended by the AAD and used in dermatological practice worldwide. Our implementation scores each criterion independently and provides an aggregate risk assessment consistent with published sensitivity/specificity data for the ABCDE method.

Risk Calculator. Multi-factor assessment based on established melanoma risk factors identified in epidemiological literature: age, mole count, skin type (Fitzpatrick), sunburn history, family history, and personal history of skin cancer. Risk stratification follows published risk models.

Fitzpatrick Skin Type Quiz. Based on the Fitzpatrick scale (Types I-VI), developed by Thomas B. Fitzpatrick at Harvard Medical School. The most widely used skin classification system in dermatology.

What we are not

Not a diagnostic service. CheckMole is an educational platform. Our tools help users decide whether to seek professional evaluation — they do not diagnose conditions. Only a biopsy examined by a dermatopathologist can definitively diagnose skin cancer.

Not AI-generated content. Our medical content is not produced by generative AI. It is researched against primary clinical literature, written with medical accuracy as the primary constraint, and verified against authoritative sources.

Not commercially influenced. We do not accept pharmaceutical sponsorship, device manufacturer funding, or paid product endorsements. Medical information is editorially independent.

Corrections & feedback

We welcome corrections from dermatologists, oncologists, and other medical professionals. If you identify an error, an outdated statistic, or a claim that needs stronger sourcing, please contact us. Accuracy is our highest priority.

Last updated: April 2026