ArticleScientific reports2023
Exploring the potential of artificial intelligence in improving skin lesion diagnosis in primary care.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence compared to family physicians and dermatologists for skin conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- Availability of Evidence for Predictive Machine Learning Algorithms in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Preferences for the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies to help detect skin cancer in primary care settings: a UK-wide discrete choice experiment (DCE).British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Mitigating hallucinations in synthesized clinical texts to improve multimodal deep learning for dermatology.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2026Article
- Review
- How good are artificial intelligence tools at identifying benign skin lesions? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the specificity of artificial intelligence tools in diagnosing suspicious skin lesions.Skin health and disease · 2026Review
- Evaluation of AI tool assisting primary healthcare physicians to diagnostic and treatment tasks.Family medicine and community health · 2026Article
- Integrating features of radiomics and CNN models for early skin cancer detection based on watershed segmentation.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Meets Nail Diagnostics: Emerging Image-Based Sensing Platforms for Non-Invasive Disease Detection.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Improving Clinical Reliability of Diffusion-Based Dermatology Image Synthesis Through Synthetic Note Alignment and Post-Generation Filtering.IEEE International Conference on Omni-layer Intelligent Systems : COINS. IEEE International Conference on Omni-layer Intelligent Systems · 2026Article
- Validation of a Dermatology-Focused Multimodal Large Language Model in Classification of Pigmented Skin Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A methodology for developing dermatological datasets: lessons from retrospective data collection for AI-based applications.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Using deep learning systems for diagnosing common skin lesions in sexual health.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- AI and Primary Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Diagnosis of psoriasis and lichen planus in real-time using neural networks based on skin Biomechanical properties obtained from numerical simulation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Towards autonomous robotic THz-based in vivo skin sensing: the PicoBot.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Multimodal Machine Learning Approach for Diagnosing Atopic Dermatitis.F1000Research · 2025Article
- AI in Aesthetic/Cosmetic Dermatology: Current and Future.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Review
- The Use of Artificial Intelligence to Detect Malignant Skin Lesions.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2024Review
- Precision Medicine-Are We There Yet? A Narrative Review of Precision Medicine's Applicability in Primary Care.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dermatological conditions are a relevant health problem. Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly being applied to dermatology as a diagnostic decision support tool using image analysis, especially for skin cancer detection and disease classification. The objective of this study was to perform a prospective validation of an image analysis ML model, which is capable of screening 44 skin diseases, comparing its diagnostic accuracy with that of General Practitioners (GPs) and teledermatology (TD) dermatologists in a real-life setting. Prospective, diagnostic accuracy study including 100 consecutive patients with a skin problem who visited a participating GP in central Catalonia, Spain, between June 2021 and October 2021. The skin issue was first assessed by the GPs. Then an anonymised skin disease picture was taken and uploaded to the ML application, which returned a list with the Top-5 possible diagnosis in order of probability. The same image was then sent to a dermatologist via TD for diagnosis, as per clinical practice. The GPs Top-3, ML model's Top-5 and dermatologist's Top-3 assessments were compared to calculate the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of the ML models. The overall Top-1 accuracy of the ML model (39%) was lower than that of GPs (64%) and dermatologists (72%). When the analysis was limited to the diagnoses on which the algorithm had been explicitly trained (n = 82), the balanced Top-1 accuracy of the ML model increased (48%) and in the Top-3 (75%) was comparable to the GPs Top-3 accuracy (76%). The Top-5 accuracy of the ML model (89%) was comparable to the dermatologist Top-3 accuracy (90%). For the different diseases, the sensitivity of the model (Top-3 87% and Top-5 96%) is higher than that of the clinicians (Top-3 GPs 76% and Top-3 dermatologists 84%) only in the benign tumour pathology group, being on the other hand the most prevalent category (n = 53). About the satisfaction of professionals, 92% of the GPs considered it as a useful diagnostic support tool (DST) for the differential diagnosis and in 60% of the cases as an aid in the final diagnosis of the skin lesion. The overall diagnostic accuracy of the model in this study, under real-life conditions, is lower than that of both GPs and dermatologists. This result aligns with the findings of few existing prospective studies conducted under real-life conditions. The outcomes emphasize the significance of involving clinicians in the training of the model and the capability of ML models to assist GPs, particularly in differential diagnosis. Nevertheless, external testing in real-life conditions is crucial for data validation and regulation of these AI diagnostic models before they can be used in primary care.
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.