Trial reportJAMA network open2019
Assessment of Accuracy of an Artificial Intelligence Algorithm to Detect Melanoma in Images of Skin Lesions.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05689437 (MIRA Clinical Learning Environment), which is not on this map. Cited by 96 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
MIRA Clinical Learning Environment (MIRACLE): Lung
Who cites it
96 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 215 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prospective Evidence on Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Melanoma Diagnostics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA dermatology · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence technologies for assessing skin lesions for referral on the urgent suspected cancer pathway to detect benign lesions and reduce secondary care specialist appointments: early value assessment.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence vs. dermoscopy for malignancy risk stratification of pigmented skin lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis for public health.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Novel Optical Imaging Techniques for Melanoma Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Predicting systemic diseases in fundus images: systematic review of setting, reporting, bias, and models' clinical availability in deep learning studies.Eye (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence for the Classification of Pigmented Skin Lesions in Populations with Skin of Color: A Systematic Review.Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence for pre-operative lymph node staging in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2021Pooled it
- The role and utility of artificial intelligence and machine learning for diagnostic prediction in general practice.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Dermatology: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance, Clinical Applications, and Implementation Challenges (2003-2025).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of an Artificial Intelligence as a Medical Device (AIaMD) for Triaging Patients Presenting to Primary Care with Concerns that They Have a Skin Cancer: A Modelling Study.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Real-world diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence in skin cancer screening.Skin health and disease · 2026Article
- Review
- Attention guided fair artificial intelligence modeling for skin cancer diagnosis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Clinician acceptability and use of smartphone digital photography in sexual assault forensic examination in an Australian regional district's sexual assault services.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Article
- ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude in clinical and dermoscopic image analysis of basal cell carcinoma and its common mimickers: A comparative performance analysis.JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2026Article
- The history of state preemption and medical device regulation: lessons for artificial intelligence oversight.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- AI-driven tongue image analysis for diagnosing and predicting coronary artery disease.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diagnostic performance of multimodal large language models in distinguishing melanoma from nevi in clinical and dermoscopic images.JAAD international · 2025Article
- Validation of a Dermatology-Focused Multimodal Large Language Model in Classification of Pigmented Skin Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Using deep learning systems for diagnosing common skin lesions in sexual health.Communications medicine · 2025Article
36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: A high proportion of suspicious pigmented skin lesions referred for investigation are benign. Techniques to improve the accuracy of melanoma diagnoses throughout the patient pathway are needed to reduce the pressure on secondary care and pathology services. Objective: To determine the accuracy of an artificial intelligence algorithm in identifying melanoma in dermoscopic images of lesions taken with smartphone and digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) cameras. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, multicenter, single-arm, masked diagnostic trial took place in dermatology and plastic surgery clinics in 7 UK hospitals. Dermoscopic images of suspicious and control skin lesions from 514 patients with at least 1 suspicious pigmented skin lesion scheduled for biopsy were captured on 3 different cameras. Data were collected from January 2017 to July 2018. Clinicians and the Deep Ensemble for Recognition of Malignancy, a deterministic artificial intelligence algorithm trained to identify melanoma in dermoscopic images of pigmented skin lesions using deep learning techniques, assessed the likelihood of melanoma. Initial data analysis was conducted in September 2018; further analysis was conducted from February 2019 to August 2019. Interventions: Clinician and algorithmic assessment of melanoma. Main Outcomes and Measures: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, and specificity of the algorithmic and specialist assessment, determined using histopathology diagnosis as the criterion standard. Results: The study population of 514 patients included 279 women (55.7%) and 484 white patients (96.8%), with a mean (SD) age of 52.1 (18.6) years. A total of 1550 images of skin lesions were included in the analysis (551 [35.6%] biopsied lesions; 999 [64.4%] control lesions); 286 images (18.6%) were used to train the algorithm, and a further 849 (54.8%) images were missing or unsuitable for analysis. Of the biopsied lesions that were assessed by the algorithm and specialists, 125 (22.7%) were diagnosed as melanoma. Of these, 77 (16.7%) were used for the primary analysis. The algorithm achieved an AUROC of 90.1% (95% CI, 86.3%-94.0%) for biopsied lesions and 95.8% (95% CI, 94.1%-97.6%) for all lesions using iPhone 6s images; an AUROC of 85.8% (95% CI, 81.0%-90.7%) for biopsied lesions and 93.8% (95% CI, 91.4%-96.2%) for all lesions using Galaxy S6 images; and an AUROC of 86.9% (95% CI, 80.8%-93.0%) for biopsied lesions and 91.8% (95% CI, 87.5%-96.1%) for all lesions using DSLR camera images. At 100% sensitivity, the algorithm achieved a specificity of 64.8% with iPhone 6s images. Specialists achieved an AUROC of 77.8% (95% CI, 72.5%-81.9%) and a specificity of 69.9%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the algorithm demonstrated an ability to identify melanoma from dermoscopic images of selected lesions with an accuracy similar to that of specialists.
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.