Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38918900›Full record

ArticleJournal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association2025

Comparing Artificial Intelligence Guided Image Assessment to Current Methods of Burn Assessment.

Justin J Lee, Mahla Abdolahnejad, Alexander Morzycki, Tara Freeman, Hannah Chan, Collin Hong, Rakesh Joshi, Joshua N Wong

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

8 authors.

Justin J LeeDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7583-2117
Mahla AbdolahnejadSkinopathy Inc., Toronto, Ontario, M2N1N5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6614-8540
Alexander MorzyckiDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4306-0014
Tara FreemanDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6626-9182
Hannah ChanSkinopathy Inc., Toronto, Ontario, M2N1N5, Canada.ORCID 0009-0006-1498-1921
Collin HongSkinopathy Inc., Toronto, Ontario, M2N1N5, Canada.ORCID 0009-0009-7754-478X
Rakesh JoshiSkinopathy Inc., Toronto, Ontario, M2N1N5, Canada.ORCID 0009-0003-1316-0791
Joshua N WongDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1575-0181

Funding

National Research Council IRAP
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Appropriate identification of burn depth and size is paramount. Despite the development of burn depth assessment aids [eg, laser Doppler imaging (LDI)], clinical assessment, which assesses partial-thickness burn depth with 67% accuracy, currently remains the most consistent standard of practice. We sought to develop an image-based artificial intelligence system that predicts burn severity and wound margins for use as a triaging tool in thermal injury management. Modified EfficientNet architecture trained by 1684 mobile-device-captured images of different burn depths was previously used to create a convoluted neural network (CNN). The CNN was modified to a novel boundary attention mapping (BAM) algorithm using elements of saliency mapping, which was used to recognize the boundaries of burns. For validation, 144 patient charts that included clinical assessment, burn location, total body surface area, and LDI assessment were retrieved for a retrospective study. The clinical images underwent CNN-BAM assessment and were directly compared with the LDI assessment. CNN using a 4-level burn severity classification achieved an accuracy of 85% (micro/macro-averaged receiver operating characteristic scores). The CNN-BAM system can successfully highlight burns from surrounding tissue with high confidence. CNN-BAM burn area segmentations attained a 91.6% accuracy, 78.2% sensitivity, and 93.4% specificity, when compared to LDI methodology. Results comparing the CNN-BAM outputs to clinical and LDI assessments have shown a high degree of correlation between the CNN-BAM burn severity predictions to those extrapolated from LDI healing potential (66% agreement). CNN-BAM algorithm gives equivalent burn-depth detection accuracy as LDI with a more economical and accessible application when embedded in a mobile device.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBurnsAdultAlgorithmsFemaleHumansLaser-Doppler FlowmetryMaleMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerRetrospective Studiesartificial intelligenceBoundary Attention Mappingburn assessmentconvoluted neural networklaser Doppler imaging

Identifiers

PMID38918900
PMCPMC11761738

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.