Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36274972›Full record

SynthesisMediators of inflammation2022

Distinguish the Value of the Benign Nevus and Melanomas Using Machine Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Suli Li, Yihang Chu, Ying Wang, Yantong Wang, Shipeng Hu, Xiangye Wu, Xinwei Qi

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Mediators of inflammation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Diagnosis melanoma with artificial intelligence systems: A meta-analysis study and systematic review.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Suli LiFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, China.
Yihang ChuCentral South University of Forestry and Technology, China.
Ying WangFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, China.
Yantong WangCHD University, China.
Shipeng HuCentral South University of Forestry and Technology, China.
Xiangye WuCentral South University of Forestry and Technology, China.
Xinwei QiFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9908-4763

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Melanomas, the most common human malignancy, are primarily diagnosed visually, beginning with an initial clinical screening and followed potentially by dermoscopic analysis, a biopsy, and histopathological examination. We aimed to systematically review the performance and quality of machine learning-based methods in distinguishing melanoma and benign nevus in the relevant literature. Method: Four databases (Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library) were searched to retrieve the relevant studies published until March 26, 2022. The Predictive model Deviation Risk Assessment tool (PROBAST) was used to assess the deviation risk of opposing law. Result: This systematic review included thirty researches with 114007 subjects and 71 machine learning models. The convolutional neural network was the main machine learning method. The pooled sensitivity was 85% (95% CI 82-87%), the specificity was 86% (82-88%), and the Conclusion: The findings of our study showed that ML algorithms had high sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing between melanoma and benign nevi. This suggests that state-of-the-art ML-based algorithms for distinguishing melanoma from benign nevi may be ready for clinical use. However, a large proportion of the earlier published studies had methodological flaws, such as lack of external validation and lack of clinician comparisons. The results of these studies should be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

MelanomaNevusAlgorithmsBiopsyHumansMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID36274972
PMCPMC9586788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.