ArticleDigital health
Exploring the influence of transformer-based multimodal modeling on clinicians' diagnosis of skin diseases: A quantitative analysis.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robustness of a convolutional neural network trained on dermoscopic images and challenged with close-up images.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026Article
- DermaCalibra: A Robust and Explainable Multimodal Framework for Skin Lesion Diagnosis via Bayesian Uncertainty and Dynamic Modulation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Deep learning in assisting dermatologists in classifying basal cell carcinoma from seborrheic keratosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The study aimed to propose a multimodal model that incorporates both macroscopic and microscopic images and analyze its influence on clinicians' decision-making with different levels of experience. Methods: First, we constructed a multimodal dataset for five skin disorders. Next, we trained unimodal models on three different types of images and selected the best-performing models as the base learners. Then, we used a soft voting strategy to create the multimodal model. Finally, 12 clinicians were divided into three groups, with each group including one director dermatologist, one dermatologist-in-charge, one resident dermatologist, and one general practitioner. They were asked to diagnose the skin disorders in four unaided situations (macroscopic images only, dermatopathological images only, macroscopic and dermatopathological images, all images and metadata), and three aided situations (macroscopic images with model 1 aid, dermatopathological images with model 2&3 aid, all images with multimodal model 4 aid). The clinicians' diagnosis accuracy and time for each diagnosis were recorded. Results: Among the trained models, the vision transformer (ViT) achieved the best performance, with accuracies of 0.8636, 0.9545, 0.9673, and AUCs of 0.9823, 0.9952, 0.9989 on the training set, respectively. However, on the external validation set, they only achieved accuracies of 0.70, 0.90, and 0.94, respectively. The multimodal model performed well compared to the unimodal models, achieving an accuracy of 0.98 on the external validation set. The results of logit regression analysis indicate that all models are helpful to clinicians in making diagnostic decisions [Odds Ratios (OR) > 1], while metadata does not provide assistance to clinicians (OR < 1). Linear analysis results indicate that metadata significantly increases clinicians' diagnosis time ( Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the multimodal model effectively improves clinicians' diagnostic performance without significantly increasing the diagnostic time. However, further large-scale prospective studies are necessary.
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.