ArticleJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV2020
Poor agreement between the automated risk assessment of a smartphone application for skin cancer detection and the rating by dermatologists.
Article in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Teledermatology vs. Face-to-Face Dermatology for the Diagnosis of Melanoma: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Article
- Interventions to improve early cancer diagnosis of symptomatic individuals: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Quantifying acceptable artefact ranges for dermatologic classification algorithms.Skin health and disease · 2021Article
- Design and Assessment of Convolutional Neural Network Based Methods for Vitiligo Diagnosis.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the Diagnostic Accuracy of an Online Artificial Intelligence Application for Skin Disease Diagnosis.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2020Article
- [Artificial intelligence and smartphone program applications (Apps) : Relevance for dermatological practice].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2020Review
- Use of Mobile Applications in Dermatology.Indian journal of dermatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral smartphone applications (app) with an automated risk assessment claim to be able to detect skin cancer at an early stage. Various studies that have evaluated these apps showed mainly poor performance. However, all studies were done in patients and lesions were mainly selected by a specialist.
objectivesTo investigate the performance of the automated risk assessment of an app by comparing its assessment to that of a dermatologist in lesions selected by the participants.
methodsParticipants of a National Skin Cancer Day were enrolled in a multicentre study. Skin lesions indicated by the participants were analysed by the automated risk assessment of the app prior to blinded rating by the dermatologist. The ratings of the automated risk assessment were compared to the assessment and diagnosis of the dermatologist. Due to the setting of the Skin Cancer Day, lesions were not verified by histopathology.
resultsWe included 125 participants (199 lesions). The app was not able to analyse 90 cases (45%) of which nine BCC, four atypical naevi and one lentigo maligna. Thirty lesions (67%) with a high and 21 with a medium risk (70%) rating by the app were diagnosed as benign naevi or seborrhoeic keratoses. The interobserver agreement between the ratings of the automated risk assessment and the dermatologist was poor (weighted kappa = 0.02; 95% CI -0.08-0.12; P = 0.74).
conclusionsThe rating of the automated risk assessment was poor. Further investigations about the diagnostic accuracy in real-life situations are needed to provide consumers with reliable information about this healthcare application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.