{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04139784946236559, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017741935483870968, 'mean_word_length': 5.24496644295302, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 2, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Haber's syndrome: report of two Chinese families

were diagnosed at the free clinics compared with BCCs (4.8%) and SCCs (3.2%) diagnosed at free clinics (P < 0.001). NNS at the free screenings was 19 (BCC), 36 (SCC), and 56 (MM). The most successful advertising methods were as follows: radio (32.7%), newspaper (29.2%), and friend (10.9%) (Table 2). Radio, friend, and electronic communications (Email, Facebook/Twitter) were more popular advertising methods for patients ≤65 years, whereas newspaper and television were the more popular methods for patients >65 years (P < 0.05). Our data add to the body of evidence demonstrating the usefulness of free screenings by quantifying the number of additional skin cancers identified through free clinics. The Midwest in particular, with higher rates of sun unhealthy behaviors such as indoor tanning and ultraviolet sun exposure, would benefit from these screenings. Proportionately, MM was the cancer most often identified at the free screenings compared with the regular clinic, further emphasizing the value of the screenings. Advertising trends continue to evolve, but in our cohort, traditional radio and newspaper advertising remained the most effective methods of communication. Skin cancer most commonly affects an older demographic (mean age >65 years), who may be more comfortable with traditional advertising modalities. Future skin cancer screening campaigns may consider regional differences in demographics when choosing an advertising method to reach the target demographic most effectively. Primary limitations of this study include geographic scope limited to a single region and self-selection/selection bias of patients presenting for the screenings. Not every patient who had a suspicious lesion identified at the free screening followed up at SSI, and therefore the true NNS is likely lower.