ArticleScientific reports2025
The usefulness of automated high frequency ultrasound image analysis in atopic dermatitis staging.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Current research landscape and future prospects of in silico modeling approaches for atopic dermatitis.JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2026Review
- The definition of response and inadequate response to topical corticosteroid treatment in atopic dermatitis and related skin inflammatory diseases: A GAThe World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- Impact of land use and land cover change on streamflow dynamics within the Meki River watershed of the Ethiopian Rift Valley Basin.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The last decades have brought an interest in ultrasound applications in dermatology. Especially in the case of atopic dermatitis, where the formation of a subepidermal low echogenic band (SLEB) may serve as an independent indicator of the effects of treatment, the use of ultrasound is of particular interest. This study proposes and evaluates the computer-aided diagnosis method for assessing atopic dermatitis (AD). The fully automated image processing framework combines advanced machine learning techniques for fast, reliable, and repeatable HFUS image analysis, supporting clinical decisions. The proposed methodology comprises accurate SLEB segmentation followed by a classification step. The data set includes 20 MHz images of 80 patients diagnosed with AD according to Hanifin and Rajka criteria, which were evaluated before and after treatment. The ground true labels- clinical evaluation based on Investigator Global Assessment index (IGA score) together with ultrasound skin examination was performed. For reliable analysis, in further experiments, two experts annotated the HFUS images twice in two-week intervals. The analysis aimed to verify whether the fully automated method can classify the HFUS images at the expert level. The Dice coefficient values for segmentation reached 0.908 for SLEB and 0.936 for the entry echo layer. The accuracy of SLEB presence detection results (IGA0) is equal to 98% and slightly outperforms the experts' assessment, which reaches 96%. The overall accuracy of the AD assessment was equal to 69% (Cohen's kappa 0.78) and was comparable with the experts' assessment, ranging between 64% and 70% (Cohen's kappa 0.73-0.79). The results indicate that the automated method can be applied to AD assessment, and its combination with standard diagnosis may benefit repeatable analysis and a better understanding of the processes that take place within the skin and aid treatment monitoring.
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.